The Georgia anti-SLAPP statute was enacted in 1996.
In a 4-3 ruling the court held that the state's anti-SLAPP statute covers only speech linked to official proceedings.
COURT OF APPEAL
Davis v. Emmis Publishing Corp.
2000, Court of Appeal (244 Ga. App. 795, 536 SE2d 809)
Great Western Bank v. Southeastern Bank
1998, Court of Appeal (234 Ga.App. 420, 507 SE2d 191)
Hawks et al. v. Hinely et al.
2001, Court of Appeal (252 Ga.App. 510)
City officials sued citizens for damages after the citizens filed papers initiating a recall of the officials. The court affirms dismissal of the complaint under the state's anti-SLAPP statute, ruling that statements made in the recall applications were protected by the statute. Whereas the trial court dismissed the unverified complaint without prejudice, on the grounds that it could be resubmitted with verification, the appellate court holds that an unverified complaint must be dismissed with prejudice if the cause of action is covered by the anti-SLAPP statute.
Metzler v. Rowell et al.
2001, Court of Appeal (248 Ga.App. 596)
Providence Construction Co. v. Bauer
1997, Court of Appeal (229 Ga.App. 679, 494 SE2d 527)
SUPERIOR COURT
An example how a court handled a SLAPP before enactment of the state's anti-SLAPP statute. For subsequent proceedings in this case see Nairon v. Land et al., Court of Appeal, 2000 (242 Ga. App. 259, 529 SE2d 390).