Schifanelli v. Queen Anne's Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs
| Decision Date | 18 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action GLR-20-2906 |
| Parties | GORDANA SCHIFANELLI, Plaintiff, v. QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Queen Anne's County Board of Commissioners (the “County Board” or “Board”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 8) and Defendant Michael Clark's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 10). The Motions are ripe for disposition, and no hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D.Md. 2021). For the reasons outlined below, the Court will grant the Motions.
Plaintiff Gordana Schifanelli is a resident of Queen Anne's County Maryland (the “County”) and the parent of children who attend or attended public schools in the County. (Am. Compl. ¶ 8, ECF No. 6). On June 5, 2020, the Superintendent of Queen Anne's County Public Schools, Dr Andrea Kane, sent a “politically charged email communication”-which called for “defunding of police, ” among other things-to the parents of public-school students using the Queen Anne's County Public Schools notification system. (Id. ¶ 10). According to Schifanelli, this “controversial” email was sent during school hours and before the end of the scheduled school year. (Id.). Later, “at a Board of Education meeting, ” Superintendent Kane “commended a County high school student for organizing and carrying out a political protest in the County, at a time when such protests had already turned violent in other parts of the country, and while the State and students were in a quarantine due to COVID-19.” (Id.).
According to Schifanelli, Maryland law prohibits County employees “from engaging in political activism during working hours.” (Id.). Schifanelli and other parents thus considered Superintendent Kane's conduct “in advocating for a political organization and activism” to be “an abuse of County School resources and [of] her position.” (Id. ¶ 11). However, when these parents “attempted to comment on the school internet platform, their posts were immediately deleted.” (Id.). As a result, “several parents made posts on local social media platforms.” (Id.). Schifanelli also contacted the County Board and members of the Queen Anne's County Board of Education about Superintendent Kane's conduct, but “representatives of each entity stated that they had no jurisdiction or control over Kane's actions.” (Id. ¶ 12).
As a result of “[t]he inability of County parents to voice their concerns using existing social media platforms” and “the County's unwillingness to address Kane's actions, ” Schifanelli felt prompted to create a private Facebook group called “Kent Island Patriots.” (Id. ¶ 13). According to Schifanelli, “Kent Island Patriots” was intended to be “a space where local parents and others could discuss Kane's recent behavior without being subjected to written abuse, retaliation and censorship.” (Id.). Superintendent Kane and Queen Anne's County Public Schools “were frequent topics of discussion among the Facebook group members, as were other political issues and viewpoints.” (Id.).
Schifanelli alleges that the “Kent Island Patriots” Facebook group “caused alarm among those who supported Kane's political activism, ” including Matthew Evans, an administrator within the County Board of Education Christine Betley, a County employee and school teacher; and Defendant Michael R. Clark, director of the County's Local Management Board. (Id. ¶ 14). According to Schifanelli, the Local Management Board is “an official office of the County government” that falls “under the [a]dministration of the [County] Board of Commissioners.” (Id. ¶ 2). Clark, Evans, and Betley “were members of an officially organized, funded and administered sub-committee of the County Local Management Board” called the “Sunday Supper Committee” (the “Committee”). (Id. ¶ 14).
On July 24, 2020, the Committee convened a virtual meeting. (Id. ¶ 15). Defendant Clark was present at the meeting in his capacity as Director of the Local Management Board. (Id.). According to the written minutes of the meeting, Clark and other members of the Committee were “conducting a petition-signing campaign to show support of School Superintendent Kane” because, according to Schifanelli, “there was fear among [Kane's] supporters that Schifanelli's speech was putting Kane's employment in jeopardy.” (Id. ¶ 16). The meeting minutes also reflect that “Committee members and agents, including Defendant Clark, discussed Schifanelli” and “identified Schifanelli as the ‘leader' of the ‘Kent Island Patriots' Facebook group.” (Id. ¶ 17). Additionally, “Clark and the others discussed Schifanelli's employment, identified her employer, and urged Committee members to contact Schifanelli's employer regarding her criticism of Superintendent Kane[, ] which they considered ‘inflammatory.'” (Id.). Further, “[t]he Committee noted that ‘[i]f anyone needs screenshots of inflammatory remarks/misinformation, or additional information about the situation,' they should ‘contact Christine [Betley] or Mary Ella [Jourdak].'” (Id.). The meeting minutes also included “detailed contact information for Schifanelli's university employer” so that members could “send the alleged ‘inflammatory remarks/misinformation.'” (Id.). Schifanelli believes “the Committee's intent was to silence [her] and/or retaliate against her for having criticized Dr. Kane, by creating a threat to her livelihood or causing her employment termination.” (Id. ¶ 18).
Schifanelli alleges that, after this meeting, “members of the County Committee and/or other persons . . . waged a sustained campaign of defamation and harassment against Schifanelli by contacting her employer and college alumni by telephone, Facebook posts, Tweets and presumably other means” to “falsely accus[e] her of being a racist, of inciting violence, of conducting a ‘smear campaign' against Superintendent Kane, and of being a liar.” (Id. ¶ 19). Schifanelli asserts that these individuals did so “[w]ith the consent and acquiescence of, direction of, or participation by Defendant Clark.” (Id.). According to Schifanelli, “[a]t least one volunteer member of the Local Management Board Committee made similar false and accusatory posts on the Maryland Bar Association's Facebook Page” and “organized a campaign to file multiple official Bar Complaints with the Maryland Bar Association's Grievance Commission.” (Id.). Additionally, “members of the Committee spread false accusations on various other social media pages, including accusing Schifanelli of being a racist and white supremacist.” (Id.). Schifanelli has also “received calls by persons who have threatened to ‘demonstrate' against her ‘racism' in front of her home and her office.” (Id.). Further, “[a] ‘friend' of the same Committee member made threats of vandalizing Schifanelli's home and ‘making her life miserable.'” (Id.). Schifanelli asserts that “[o]ther members of the community have perpetuated these falsehoods created during the Committee's campaign.” (Id.). According to Schifanelli, after “Committee members or those encouraged by the Committee members[ ] complained about [her] to Facebook, ” “Schifanelli's law practice Facebook page, ” “private Facebook page, ” and “her access to the [Kent Island Patriots] Facebook group” were “permanently suspended by Facebook” in October 2020. (Id.). Finally, Schifanelli alleges that “[s]he has since received death threats.” (Id.).
On July 29, 2020, “after having been alerted by her employer that [it] had received defamatory communications from Committee members, including texts, Facebook posts, telephone calls, etc., ” Schifanelli sent a “written demand” to Defendant Clark and “a known member/agent of his Committee, Mary Ella Jourdak, ” requesting that they “cease and desist” sending any further communications to Schifanelli's employer. (Id. ¶ 20). Schifanelli did not receive a response. (Id.). According to Schifanelli, however, “the Committee member/agent continued contacting not only Schifanelli's employer, but also the Maryland Attorney General's office, accusing Schifanelli of the various aforementioned falsehoods.” (Id.).
On or about August 3, 2020, Schifanelli sent a notice to the County Board “alerting them to the past and ongoing actions of [the] Local Management Board Director and [its] agents/members . . . and of the possibility of bringing suit against the County for various tort claims including defamation.” (Id. ¶ 21).
Schifanelli alleges that, “as a direct and proximate result of Defendant Clark's actions and acquiescence” and “Defendants' conspiring and actions against her, ” she has suffered “damage to her reputation as an attorney, ” “professor, ” and “resident of Queen Anne's County”; “severe emotional distress”; “loss of income as an attorney”; and “dignitary damages for having been retaliated against and deprived of her First Amendment Right to free speech, including having been silenced on Facebook.” (Id. ¶ 22).
Schifanelli filed suit against the County Board, Clark, Evans, and Betley on October 8, 2020. (ECF No. 1). On November 9, 2020 Schifanelli filed an Amended Complaint, which dropped Evans and Betley as Defendants. (ECF No. 6). Schifanelli's seven-count Amended Complaint alleges: conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) against Clark in his individual and official capacities (Counts One & Two); as well as violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count Three); false light (Count Four); defamation (Count Five); defamation per se (Counts Six & Seven) against the County Board. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 23-51). Schifanelli...
To continue reading
Request your trial