Wertz v. Allen

The plaintiff did not rebut the existence of conditional privilege with evidence of actual or express malice regarding his defamation claim, arising from his expulsion from a respiratory therapy program, based partially on the defendant's denial that she gave the plaintiff permission to be absent from his externship.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellant Erik Van Wertz filed an action against Appellee Lashonda Bonner Allen, alleging fraud and defamation.1 Allen moved for summary judgment. Finding that no genuine issues of material fact existed, the trial court granted Allen’s motion for summary judgment.2 Wertz appeals the trial court’s summary judgment ruling, arguing that Allen’s defamatory statements were not protected by an absolute or conditional privilege, and that Wertz otherwise established each element of a claim for defamation. Wertz further contends that he alleged sufficient facts to support a claim of fraud. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. A defendant can prevail on a motion for summary judgment “by showing the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of plaintiff’s case.” Footnote and punctuation omitted. Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. v. King , 299 Ga. App. 267, 268 682 SE2d 346 2009. “On appeal from the grant of summary judgment this Court conducts a de novo review of the evidence to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact and whether the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law.” Citations omitted. Campbell v. The Landings Assn. , 289 Ga. 617, 618 713 SE2d 860 2011.

So viewed, the evidence shows that Wertz was enrolled in the respiratory therapy program at Macon State College “MSC” in 2006. As part of the respiratory therapy program, Wertz was required to complete a one-semester clinical externship that involved working 36 12-hour shifts at one of the hospitals with which MSC had a contract. Wertz was assigned to the Medical Center of Central Georgia the “Georgia Medical Center” for his externship in 2006. During each of his shifts at the Georgia Medical Center, Wertz worked alongside an assigned “preceptor,” who served as his mentor.3

Wertz v. Allen

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report