On August 13, Judge Jeffrey Beacham of the Superior Court of New Jersey in Essex County ordered former South Orange-Maplewood Board of Education member Elissa Malespina to pay court fees of $40,474 to cover the legal costs of defendants in a defamation suit that Malespina brought and which was decided in the defendants’ favor in April.
See a pdf of the ruling attached below.
The defamation case was related to the arrest of Columbia High School Principal Frank Sanchez in March 2024 on a felony charge of child endangerment and a misdemeanor charge of simple assault related to a 2023 altercation with a 15-year-old CHS student. A grand jury dismissed the felony charge against Sanchez in June 2024. Sanchez was reinstated as Principal days later, having been placed on administrative leave in January 2024. The misdemeanor charge was dismissed in Maplewood municipal court on April 17.
A grassroots group called “Friends of Frank” formed after his arrest to raise funds for Sanchez’s legal fees and held rallies in his support. Former BOE member Courtney Winkfield and Friends of Frank alleged that the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office had brought charges based on unvetted information that they said was inappropriately provided to the Maplewood Police Department by former BOE member Elissa Malespina.
In December 2024, Malespina, who admitted that she did deliver a draft report regarding the altercation between Sanchez and the student to Maplewood police but did so because she is a “mandatory reporter,” filed a defamation suit against Winkfield and several members of “Friends of Frank” alleging the defendants “maliciously, intentionally, and/or recklessly defamed” her by stating she “acted in a criminal manner, acted in an unethical manner, and directly caused Principal Frank Sanchez, Principal at Columbia High School, to be arrested and charged with a felony and misdemeanor.”
In his ruling in April, Beacham wrote, “Plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case as to each essential element of any cause of action in the Complaint, and/or Defendants have established that the Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted, and/or or there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
After the August 13 ruling awarding legal fees, defendants Winkfield, Rachel Fisher, Stephanie Nasteff released a statement through the “Friends of Frank” that lauded the decision and characterized the judge’s pronouncements in the August 13 online call announcing the order (Village Green did not attend the online conference).
Through the release, Winkfield, Fisher and Nasteff said, “We are gratified that Judge Beacham followed the law and ensured that this effort to retaliate against us and negatively impact the SOMA community will finally come to an end. We fervently hope that these just results will prevent Malespina or anyone else from trying to use the courts to silence their neighbors. … Once the legal bills are paid in full, we plan to donate the remainder to nonprofits supporting marginalized youth. Thank you again to our families, friends, and neighbors for your unwavering support.”
The release says that Beacham identified Malespina’s suit as a SLAPP suit or or Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, which New Jersey law describes as “meritless lawsuits intended to intimidate them for exercising their free speech rights.”
Read the full release from Friends of Frank below.
In response to the ruling, James H. Davis III, Esq., who is representing the student in an ongoing civil lawsuit and who represented Malespina in the defamation case — also sent a release on Malespina’s behalf (read the full release below), asserting that Malespina has been unfairly attacked for acting as a mandatory reporter of alleged child abuse and that she was “harassed, threatened, and intimidated” for reporting the incident to police. Davis said that Malespina would appeal the decision and “seek all other remedies at her disposal.”
Davis also asserted that Malespina’s reporting was valid in that Sanchez “ultimately had to decide if he was going to apologize to the student and her family face-to-face for what he did or face a trial for misdemeanor simple assault – he chose the former. That apology and other requirements the principal must comply with, which I am not permitted to know, are why the misdemeanor charge was dismissed.”
The Maplewood prosecutor, who dismissed the misdemeanor charge, has declined to comment.
James Davis is also president of the Black Parents Workshop.
From Friends of Frank:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Today, Judge Jeffrey Beacham of NJ Superior Court in Essex County entered a fee judgement in the case Malespina v Winkfield et al, determining that Elissa Malespina must pay $40,474 to the defendants for legal fees. Judge Beacham had previously dismissed Malespina’s complaint with prejudice, identifying it as a SLAPP suit. New Jersey’s anti-SLAPP law requires that the plaintiff in a SLAPP suit pay the entire legal fees of the people they wrongly sued. The judge determined that Malespina must pay the full cost of the defense because anything less would mean that the community, through its donations to the defendants legal fund, was subsidizing Malespina’s attempt to punish free speech.
Winkfield, Fisher and Nasteff said, “We are gratified that Judge Beacham followed the law and ensured that this effort to retaliate against us and negatively impact the SOMA community will finally come to an end. We fervently hope that these just results will prevent Malespina or anyone else from trying to use the courts to silence their neighbors. No one should have to experience getting dragged into court for speaking up for what is right. We could not have endured this unwelcome experience without the emotional and financial support of the community. We never felt alone, and for that, we could not be more grateful. Once the legal bills are paid in full, we plan to donate the remainder to nonprofits supporting marginalized youth. Thank you again to our families, friends, and neighbors for your unwavering support.”
Full response from James Davis on behalf of Elissa Malespina:
“The ruling by Judge Beachem was unfortunate, but expected based on how the law is written. But let’s not lose sight of the real issue here. At the heart of this matter is a 17-year-old student who was excessively restrained by a principal, suspended, exiled from CHS, and relegated to home instruction without one opportunity to speak on her own behalf about what happened to her before all of that happened. Elissa Malespina is a mandatory child abuse and neglect reporter under New Jersey state law, N.J.A.C. 6A:16-11, which requires that the reporter’s name be kept confidential. My client followed the law and was then punished for it by being identified as a reporter, in addition to being harassed, threatened, and intimidated by an overzealous mob who couldn’t care less about what happened to the actual victim of this case. No one from that group has reached out to the student or her family to provide support at any point, even though they never cease to claim to care about the student. Their sole purpose was to destroy the livelihood and reputation of my client.
Elissa Malespina acted out of duty to the law and her concern for marginalized students. And based on Ms. Malespina’s compliance with the requirements of the law, the following occurred:
- The district was forced to address the actions of the principal after ignoring the student’s complaint for months.
- The district was forced to notify law enforcement, which prompted an independent investigation of the matter by the Essex County prosecutor and subsequently the Maplewood Township Prosecutor.
- The principal ultimately had to decide if he was going to apologize to the student and her family face-to-face for what he did or face a trial for misdemeanor simple assault – he chose the former. That apology and other requirements the principal must comply with, which I am not permitted to know, are why the misdemeanor charge was dismissed.
The family has shown a tremendous amount of grace and mercy despite the way the student has been falsely characterized and treated by the principal and some people in this community who accused her of a fight that never occurred and an attempted confrontation that never took place. The student and her family obtained some modicum of justice because Ms. Malespina followed the law and persevered through social media attacks. My client lost two jobs and has suffered a significant amount of emotional distress due to the lies and disinformation spread across social media by the overzealous mob, and yet, she remained focused on ensuring that the student was taken care of. Unbeknownst to many, Ms. Malespina provides advocacy services, often pro bono, for special needs students in and out of her community. But despite her altruism, Ms. Malespina has every right to seek justice against those who expressly and continuously malign her and her family. She will appeal the judge’s ruling and seek all other remedies at her disposal – It’s a bit too early to take a victory lap.”
Davis Advocacy & Consulting LLC
