SCOVT affirms SLAPP orders striking invasion of privacy claim; reverses trial court refusal to award attorney fees paid by insurer.

Garrett M. Cornelius v. The Chronicle, Inc., 2019 VT 4 [filed 1/25/2019]

REIBER, C.J. These consolidated cases raise issues concerning Vermont’s antiSLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute, 12 V.S.A. § 1041. Plaintiff Garrett Cornelius filed suit alleging invasion of privacy by newspaper, the Chronicle, after newspaper published two articles containing information about plaintiff. In a series of orders, the trial court granted newspaper’s motions to strike the claims under the anti-SLAPP statute and awarded newspaper a small fraction of the attorney’s fees it sought. Plaintiff appeals the court’s orders striking his claims and newspaper appeals the amount of attorney’s fees. We conclude that the claims were properly stricken under the anti-SLAPP statute and that the court erred in limiting the attorney’s fees award. Therefore, we affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

The award of fees is mandatory when a motion to strike is granted.  The court erroneously reasoned that because newspaper’s insurer was paying the bulk of the fee, newspaper was entitled only to an award for what it paid out of pocket. Courts from Massachusetts and California—states whose anti-SLAPP statutes were used as models for the Vermont statute—agree that attorney’s fees should be granted regardless of whether the fees are paid for by insurance or a third party. See Felis, ¶ 31 (explaining that Vermont statute was based on California statute and contains language from Massachusetts statute). We conclude that the court improperly limited the attorney’s fees to the insurance deductible. The orders striking plaintiff’s complaint are affirmed. The order regarding attorney’s fees is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.