Tort – SLAPP – Criminal complaints

Listen to this article

Where claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process have been brought against a defendant who filed two criminal complaints against the plaintiffs, the defendant’s special motion to dismiss pursuant to the Massachusetts anti-SLAPP statute (G L.c. 231, §59H) should be allowed in part and denied in part, as one of the two criminal complaints lacked any reasonable factual support or arguable basis in law.

“Ayva Bezanson (‘Ayva’) and her parents (‘Mr. Bezanson’ and ‘Ms. Bezanson,’ collectively ‘plaintiffs’) have filed suit against Rachel Dobbs (‘Dobbs’), Ayva’s high school guidance counselor, and Amesbury High School (‘AHS’), the school Ayva attends. …

“Here, Dobbs has met her burden of showing that the claims against her are based solely upon her petitioning activity. Plaintiffs brought claims against Dobbs for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, both of which are based entirely upon the filing by Dobbs of two criminal complaints. …

“Dobbs’ first criminal complaint alleged that Ayva violated Massachusetts wiretapping laws by recording their conversation without Dobbs’ consent. …

“Here, the facts presented in both the complaint and affidavits demonstrate that Ayva used her cellphone to record the conversation with Dobbs without her consent. Because that activity closely aligns with activities prohibited by state law, plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden of showing that the December Report lacked any reasonable factual support or arguable basis in law. …

“The May Report contains allegations that Ayva committed some sort of crime with respect to her May, 2022, conversation in the nurse’s office. Plaintiffs’ complaint, and subsequent filings, refer to the May Report as pressing charges against Ayva for witness intimidation and obstruction of justice. It is not clear from the pleading and affidavit, however, that the May Report indeed accused Ayva of a crime. Nonetheless, the parties appear to agree that the complaint resulted in charges being filed against Ayva.

“With respect to the May Report, the Court concludes that plaintiffs have met their burden under Bristol Asphalt [Co. v. Rochester Bituminous Prods., Inc., 493 Mass. 539 (2024)]. Based upon the pleading and affidavit, the May Report lacked any reasonable factual support or arguable basis in law. The record shows that Ayva, a minor student, was discussing her pending criminal charges with the school nurse. That conversation took place in the nurse’s office, her designated ‘safe space,’ and happened to be overheard by one or more other students. Such conduct cannot be fairly construed as being criminal. The special motion to dismiss will therefore be denied with respect to the activity described in the May Report.”

Bezanson, et al. v. Dobbs, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 02-100-26) (13 pages) (Gorton, J.) (Civil Action No. 25-11270-NMG) (Feb. 25, 2026).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.