Arneja v. Gildar

Attorney Harnam Arneja (plaintiff) filed a petition with the District of Columbia Rental Accommodations Office on behalf of tenants challenging a rent-control exemption granted to the tenants’ landlord. Attorney Robert Gildar (defendant) represented the landlord. Arneja, Gildar, and their clients were in a hearing room at the Rental Accommodations Office awaiting the hearing officer’s arrival. Gildar told Arneja that he was unnecessarily pursuing the case, that he did not understand the law, that he should go back to law school before practicing law, and that he better learn English and go to elementary school. Arneja sued Gildar for defamation, alleging that Gildar’s statements were malicious attacks on his ethnicity and education background and impugned his professional ability. Gildar maintained that the statements were intended to persuade Arneja to settle the dispute. The trial court granted Gildar’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that the statements were made preliminary to a judicial proceeding and were sufficiently related to the underlying dispute to be protected by the judicial-proceedings privilege. Finding a strong connection between Gildar’s defamatory statements and the parties’ opposing interpretations of the Rental Housing Act, the court explained that the English language is an issue when opposing parties differ as to the interpretation of a statute. The fact that Arneja, Gildar, and their clients were sitting in a hearing room awaiting the examiner’s arrival also supported the conclusion that Gildar’s statements were made preliminary to a judicial proceeding. Arneja appealed.