OLAES v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

ISSUE: Can the defendant show that the cause of action triggering the claim is justifiable under the section 425.16, subdivision (e) of the California Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation statute?
Facts: In 2001, an employee from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company complained about unwelcomed comments and touching from a fellow co-worker, Olaes. In May 2003, another woman complained about unwanted touching by the plaintiff, Olaes. Nationwide Mutual terminated Olaes. Olaes filed a complaint alleging Nationwide Mutual falsely accused him of sexual harassment and failed to adequately investigate prior to his termination.
Discussion: A female employee of Nationwide Mutual complained about a fellow co-workers unwelcomed advance upon her. Nationwide conducted an investigation of the matter and found another female employee was having the same complaints against the same co-worker, Danny Olaes. Mr. Olaes has filed a lawsuit against Nationwide stating that he was falsely indicted of sexual harassment and Nationwide did not complete a proper investigation before terminating him. Nationwide Mutual followed up with special motion to strike Olaes’s complaint, asserting that the lawsuit arose out of Nationwide’s exercise of its right to free speech on an important public issue, sexual harassment. The trial court denied Nationwide’s motion and Nationwide appealed. The statutory (section 425.16) definition is at question and the plaintiff and defendant have different interpretations of what this section means and covers.
Decision: Nationwide Mutual argued that the statue applied because the reference to “any other official proceeding authorized by law” includes non-governmental proceedings such as sexual harassment procedures authorized and required by law. The trial court disagreed with Nationwide’s definition