Filed 12/6/21 Foley v. McElroy CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA J. PATRICK FOLEY, D077299 Plaintiff and Appellant, v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2019- 00048285-CU-DF-CTL) ROBERT W. McELROY, et al., Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kenneth Medel, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of Carleton L. Briggs and Carleton L. Briggs for Plaintiff and Appellant. Greene & Roberts, Maria C. Roberts, Lauren S. Cartwright; Niddrie Addams Fuller Singh and Rupa G. Singh for Defendants and Respondents. INTRODUCTION J. Patrick Foley, a Roman Catholic priest, sued his diocese, the bishop, and two diocese employees for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress after they answered media questions about a list of priests “credibly accused” of child molestation. The trial court granted the defendants’ special anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motion to strike (Code Civ. Proc.,1 § 425.16) and dismissed the action. On appeal, Foley contends the court erred in finding he failed to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his claims. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. The Parties Foley is, and was at all times relevant to the underlying action, a Roman Catholic priest. At one time he held an assignment within The Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego (diocese or Diocese of San Diego), an ecclesiastical territory that includes San Diego County. 2 Defendants indicate that Foley remains under the authority of the bishop of this diocese. Robert W. McElroy has been the bishop of the Diocese of San Diego since 2015. Rodrigo Valdivia and Kevin C. Eckery are both employees of The 1 All further unspecified statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure. 2 “The Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego” was named as a defendant in the complaint. Defendants submitted evidence that the Diocese of San Diego is not a legal entity but rather is a “canonical designation” that refers to “apostolic activity . . . within the specific geographical territory under the authority of the Office of the Bishop of San Diego.” Defendants further established that the legal entity with authority to “hold the temporalities and conduct the everyday business” of the Diocese of San Diego is “The Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego, a corporation sole.” As the distinction drawn by Defendants is not material to the issues before us, and for the sake of consistency with the complaint, we refer to the “diocese” or the “Diocese of San Diego” within this opinion. By doing so, however, we do not mean to signal disagreement with Defendants’ assertions. 2 Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego (see footnote 2, ante). The Diocese of San Diego, McElroy, Valdivia, and …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals