Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for partial summary judgment

Case 2:08-cv-00575-GLF-NMK Document 75 Filed 01/14/10 Page 2 of 54
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-i-
Page
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................... 1
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 2
II. ARGUMENT..................................................................................................................... 4
A. Freshwater’s Defamation Counterclaim Is Entirely Unfounded And
Therefore Should Be Dismissed ............................................................................ 4
1. The Dennises Did Not Make Many Of The Allegedly Defamatory
Statements And Therefore Cannot Be Held Liable For Them .................. 6
2. The Statements That Zach Dennis Made During The Termination
Hearing Are Protected By An Absolute Privilege, Or In the
Alternative, Are Qualifiedly Privileged..................................................... 8
3. The Statements That The Dennises Made To HR On Call
Investigators Are Also Protected By A Qualified Privilege .................... 10
4. Freshwater Is A Limited-Purpose Public Figure Who Cannot Show
That The Dennises Acted With Actual Malice........................................ 11
B. Freshwater’s Counterclaim For Intentional Infliction Of Emotional
Distress Is Similarly Unsupported And Should Be Dismissed............................ 14
1. Freshwater Has Offered No Evidence That The Dennises Intended
To Cause Him Emotional Distress Or That They Should Have
Known That Their Conduct Would Cause Him Emotional Distress....... 15
2. Freshwater Has Offered No Evidence That The Dennises’ Conduct
Was Outrageous And Extreme................................................................. 15
3. Freshwater Has Offered No Evidence That He Suffered From A
Severe Or Debilitating Injury................................................................... 17
C. The Dennises Should Be Granted Summary Judgment On Their Battery
Claim.................................................................................................................... 18
1. Freshwater Acted With The Requisite Intent To Commit Battery .......... 19
2. Freshwater’s Application Of The Tesla Coil To Zach’s Arm
Constitutes Offensive Contact. ................................................................ 20
3. Freshwater’s Remaining Arguments As To The Dennises’ Battery
Claim Are Unavailing.............................................................................. 21
D. Freshwater Provides No Viable Defense For His Own Actions Made In
Violation Of The Dennises’ Establishment Clause Rights.................................. 24
1. Freshwater Cannot Pass The Blame For His Personal Deprivation
Of The Dennises’ Constitutional Rights.................................................. 24