A Scottsdale Unified School District mother, Amanda Wray and her husband Daniel with the assistance of the Dhillon Law Group defeated a lawsuit filed by Mark Greenburg, the father of the former Board President, Jann-Michael Greenburg.
On Thursday, the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County dismissed Mark Greenburg’s complaint against the Wrays. The Court also ruled in favor of the Wrays’ anti-SLAPP motion, entitling the family to seek an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.
The Court found Greenburg’s “lawsuit was substantially motivated by a desire to deter, retaliate against or prevent Ms. Wray’s lawful exercise of her constitutional rights.”
Scottsdale attorney and popular Substack author, Chris Evans, noted that the Court referenced a particularly damning quote from the senior Greenburg as evidence that the “lawsuit was substantially motivated by a desire to deter, retaliate against or prevent the Defendant’s lawful exercise of her constitutional rights.”
“Amanda Wray is just fixated on you and if you think for one minute that when you run for MCCC that she is going to leave you alone, I think you’re wrong. It is a mistake not to surgically punish her with litigation,” the Court quoted Mark Greenburg.
Mark Greenburg targeted Amanda Wray, after she criticized the school board’s delayed reopening, mask policy, and curriculum being implemented by the SUSD board and his son, Jann-Michael Greenburg.
In response to the advocacy of the Wrays and other parents, including Dhillon Law Group client Kimberly Stafford, Mr. Greenburg used pseudonymous social media accounts to gather information about and bully Amanda Wray and the others, leading them to feel intimidated.
As the Arizona Daily Independent previously reported, Mark Greenburg also collected massive amounts of information about Ms. Wray and other parents on a Google Drive folder that was not password-protected and shared it with Jann-Michael and another SUSD board member. After Jann-Michael emailed several parents with a screenshot that included the Google Drive’s URL and an indication of its contents, many members of the public and journalists discovered what Mr. Greenburg stored there.
Greenburg sued Amanda for defamation for describing his conduct as harassment and also claimed she invaded his privacy by viewing the information he collected about her and the other parents.
The Wray’s attorneys with the Dhillon Law Group responded immediately by filing a special motion to dismiss under Arizona’s anti-SLAPP statute, arguing that Greenburg’s lawsuit was filed in retaliation against Amanda for exercising her free speech rights. After a full-day hearing at which both Amanda and Greenburg testified, the Court granted the Wray’s motion and gave the Wray’s permission to seek an award of their attorneys’ fees and costs.
“After I defended myself and the rights of children in Scottsdale, I suddenly found myself on the receiving end of two lawsuits from the president of the school board’s father. Nobody should find themselves in court for their public advocacy, and the judge’s ruling not only vindicates my First Amendment rights, but also the rights of other parents who wish to speak out but may be afraid to do so. I also look forward to vindicating my First Amendment rights in the federal lawsuit I and other parents filed after the school district retaliated against me for speaking out,” stated Wray.
“This is the first anti-SLAPP ruling under Arizona law after an evidentiary hearing,” said attorney Harmeet Dhillon. “Not only did justice prevail for Amanda Wray’s First Amendment rights, but this is an unprecedented victory for parental rights in the state of Arizona.”
“With this new anti-SLAPP law, the Arizona legislature made clear that the state’s courts cannot be weaponized to chill citizens’ core protected political speech,” said Mike Columbo, a Dhillon Law Group partner. “Corroborated by an email to his son, a school official, saying they should ‘punish’ Ms. Wray with litigation, Mr. Greenburg has given us the textbook case for why this law was necessary.”
“We as a country need parents like Amanda to fight for their rights as parents and their children’s right to a quality education,” said Dhillon Law Group Associate Jesse Franklin-Murdock. “After Amanda took the witness stand and spoke the truth, the Court recognized that the claims against her were not viable, and that she was targeted for her First Amendment activity. We hope the Court’s ruling becomes a precedent that protects Arizonans’ rights in years to come.”
View the case here.