Spitler

Spitler v. Children's Institute International

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 4th 432·14 Cal. Rptr. 2d 197·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1390·92 Daily Journal DAR 16091·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9663
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 1, 1992B065906California3,104 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lord, J.

Introduction

In this appeal we again review the claims of plaintiff Babette J. Spitler, one of the original defendants in the McMartin Preschool child molestation prosecution, against Children’s Institute International (CII) and Kathleen “Kee” MacFarlane (MacFarlane), the child care professionals who interviewed the McMartin preschool children at the behest of the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office. The trial court granted CII and MacFarlane’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that each of four statements identified as defamatory by plaintiff in the discovery process was either privileged, protected opinion, not “of or concerning” plaintiff, and/or barred by the statute of limitations. The court also denied plaintiff’s request for additional discovery pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (h). This appeal follows.

Facts

Plaintiff, a teacher at the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, was indicted by the Los Angeles County Grand Jury on March 22, 1984, for allegedly participating in the molestation of numerous children attending the preschool. After an 18-month preliminary hearing, plaintiff and 6 codefendants were bound over for trial.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.