Britt v. Yarbrough, No. A26A1234, 2026 WL 2664006, __ S.E.2d __ (Ga. Ct. App. Sept. 10, 2026). The court (Padgett, J.; Doyle, P.J., and Markle, J., concur) affirms in part, vacates in part, and remands dismissal of a coach’s defamation and tortious interference claims. Statements concerning the coach’s conduct toward children addressed a public concern and satisfied the anti-SLAPP statute’s protected-activity prong. Id. at **4–5. The trial court still had to determine whether the claims had a probability of success. Its defamation analysis omitted the plaintiff’s public-or-private-figure status, the applicable malice standard, and the specific privilege asserted. Its treatment of tortious interference as merely derivative also lacked the required analysis. The court remanded both claims for the second-prong inquiry, rather than deciding that either claim would ultimately prevail. Id. at **5–6.
