The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a trial judge's decision keeping alive a defamation lawsuit brought by a Brunswick lawyer who claims statements made by the American Civil Liberties Union ruined his career.

Attorney B. Reid Zeh, who for several years served as a public defender and ran a private practice handling felony cases, sued the ACLU over online postings he claims falsely accused him of charging clients who should have received free representation. 

His lawyers, Brent Savage and Brian Tanner of Savannah's Savage, Turner, Durham, Pinckney & Savage, said the ACLU's accusations sent Zeh's career spiraling. 

"Instead of doing any research, the ACLU just got some information from clearly unreliable witnesses and threw it up on Facebook to raise money on false allegations," Turner said.

The lawyer said the accusations contributed to Zeh's problems with alcohol and his own legal issues. He was indicted last year on multiple charges including aggravated assault and kidnapping over violent incidents involving his girlfriend and spent several months in jail before being released on a $50,000 bond in February.

"The ACLU exacerbated what was going on with him," Turner said. 

Zeh lost his county contract and is living under house arrest awaiting trial, Savage said.

The organization is represented by Georgia ACLU Legal Director Sean J. Young; ACLU staff attorney Brian Hauss; Leslie Eason and Tiffany Taylor of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani and Augusta solo John Batson.

The ACLU had not provided a response to requests for comment on Thursday afternoon. 

The case began with a lawsuit the ACLU filed in U.S. District Court in Georgia's Southern District  in 2018 against Glynn County, Sheriff Neal Jump, Chief Magistrate Judge Alex Attwood and Zeh. That lawsuit claimed the county was running an unconstitutional "two-tired" bond system for accused misdemeanor offenders under which those who could not afford to pay a predetermined bail or hire a private lawyer remained in jail for weeks or months without a hearing.              

The complaint included allegations that Zeh "enforces a policy of delaying representation to misdemeanor arrestees until well after their bail has already been set."

The putative class action was filed on behalf of two named plaintiffs charged with criminal trespass, both of whom were who were in jail because they could not pay an "automatically set" bail of $1,256.

The ACLU later filed a motion to add two plaintiffs, including Robert Cox, who was arrested in 2015 for misdemeanor shoplifting. At his arraignment Cox attempted to plead guilty, but the prosecutor said he was boosting the charge to a felony and transferring it to superior court. 

The judge told Cox he should get a lawyer. He subsequently went to Zeh's office, agreeing to pay him $2,500 to defend the case. Cox's mother mailed Zeh a check later that day, and Zeh "ultimately secured a dismissal of the felony charge against Cox," according to the appellate opinion.

When the ACLU added Cox to the litigation, it posted an article on its blog saying that "Zeh routinely ignores his clients or worse—extorts them to enrich himself." 

"Instead of looking out for his client's interests, Zeh took advantage of the family by charging them $2,500 for services that should have been free-of-charge," said the posting, which remains on the organization's website. 

The posting linked to a Facebook ad with Zeh's picture and the headline: "Rather than trying to get his clients out of jail, this public defender extorts money from them."

The ACLU's federal lawsuit was successful, with the defendants agreeing last year to hold bond hearings at least every 48 hours and to take into consideration a defendant's ability to pay a cash bond, among other stipulations.

While the lawsuit was pending in August 2018, Zeh filed a defamation suit in Glynn County Superior Court against the ACLU and the Brunswick News newspaper, which had published a story about the alleged extortion.

Both defendants filed motions to dismiss, and Judge William Woodrum granted the newspaper's motion.

But he denied the ACLU's motion, which had argued that Zeh's suit was barred by Georgia's Anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation statute.

The ACLU appealed, but on Tuesday the Court of Appeals agreed with Woodrum.

The opinion written by Judge Clyde Reese with the concurrence of Judges Todd Markle and Verda Colvin said said the Anti-SLAPP statute requires a two-step analysis. First the court must decide whether the challenged action arises from the defendant's protected activity, such as free speech or petitioning activity. If so, the second step is analyzing whether the plaintiff's complaint is likely to prevail.

The appeals court focused on that second item. Defamation claims require a showing of false and defamatory statements provided to a third party, negligence and "special harm or the actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm," Reese wrote. 

Reese wrote the trial court was correct in determining that "there was a probability that he will prevail on his defamation claim.

"The appeals court just affirmed what the trial court got right," said Tanner. "The ACLU just went way beyond where they should have been and swallowed what [Cox] and his mom said hook, line & sinker."

"Now people are going to find out this man did nothing wrong before the ACLU made these allegations destroying his reputation and his law practice," he said.