Michael Howard, a licensed attorney and former state court solicitor in Washington County, is set to appear in court Thursday to make his case on why he needs court protection from a former client who he says has been stalking him from a public sidewalk and via Facebook.
Background
Michael Howard filed a Petition for a Stalking Protective Order on March 27 against Washington County resident Stacey Johnson after Johnson videoed Howard’s law office from the sidewalk in Sandersville. Howard was hosting a campaign event for his wife, Amy, who is running for Chair of the Washington County Board of Commissioners. Michael Howard is the city attorney for Tennille and served as the county attorney for Washington County and as State Court Solicitor before he resigned last summer while under state investigation and in the throws of a public information campaign on his ethical practices.
The 45-page application written by Howard included a two-page typed statement and 38 pages of exhibits, most of which include Facebook posts made by Johnson. In the statement, Howard alleges Johnson committed the act of stalking and placed him and his wife in fear for their safety.
Notably, Johnson is a former client of Howard’s and the subject of Howard’s ire in a now-viral video in which Howard repeatedly screams “F*** you” at Johnson. The majority of the Facebook posts referenced as exhibits followed the release of that video and continued on until Howard resigned from his position as both state court solicitor and county attorney for the Washington County Board of Commissioners. Several of the posts were news articles on the GBI investigation into Howard in his official capacity and in his application for a protective order, Howard notes that the behavior is not illegal but “strange and alarming.”
On March 27, Judge Tommy Smith of the Middle Judicial Circuit granted the ex-parte Temporary Protective Order (TPO) barring Johnson from being within 200 yards of Michael Howard and prohibiting direct and indirect contact with Howard or his immediate family. A hearing was subsequently scheduled for April 21, at which point Johnson would be given an opportunity to oppose a twelve month order.
In the days following the TPO, Johnson published the body camera footage from Sandersville Police on social media. The police had been called in response to Johnson’s presence on the sidewalk outside the event. In the video, Amy Howard can be seen exiting the campaign event to talk with Johnson, offering him snacks and water. More background and Protective Order Petition by Howard here.
Effort to Recuse Judge Smith
On March 31, Atlanta-based attorney Ben Sessions filed an entry of appearance on the case as well as a Motion to Recuse Judge Tommy Smith. In the filing, Sessions alleged that Smith had engaged in improper ex parte communication with Howard in the past, attended a private, invitation-only Christmas party hosted by the Howards, and had already acknowledged any real or perceived conflicts of interest when he voluntarily recused himself in at least three other matters involving Michael and Amy Howard.
On April 6, Judge Smith denied the Motion to Recuse, stating:
- The alleged ex parte communication involved a matter in which Howard was not a party to the case. Specifically, Smith said he’d been petitioned by the DA’s office on behalf of the Solicitor General (Howard) to sign an order allowing a state court judge to compel the testimony of a witness in a domestic violence case. He said no notice or hearing is required by the statute.
- Attending the Christmas dinner “did not rise to the level of financial benefit” and the Court is “not required to recuse itself because it has received any form of contribution from a party to the action.”
Smith also wrote that prior recusals are “not an admission that the Court is incapable of being impartial in cases involving [Howard],” noting that he is currently presiding over a number of cases involving clients of Michael Howard.
Anti-SLAPP Motion Filed to Toss Case Entirely
On April 15, attorney Andrew Fleischman of Sessions & Fleischman filed a Motion to Strike under Georgia’s anti-SLAPP law on behalf of Stacey Johnson. (SLAPP – “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation”)
Anti-SLAPP laws in Georgia protect individuals from frivolous lawsuits that are used to chill free speech, particularly on issues of public importance. OCGA § 9-11-11.1 is a provision that permits the early dismissal of cases that target protected speech and allows attorneys fees to be awarded to the individual defending themselves against such a suit.
In his Motion, Fleischman argued that Johnson’s acts of criticizing Michael Howard, a former elected official who still serves in a public capacity for the City of Tennille, and Amy Howard, a candidate for public office, are not stalking. He argued:
- Johnson’s statements on social media concern issues of public concern, including details of Howard’s resignation in the face of an ethical inquiry.
- Johnson’s speech is protected by the anti-SLAPP statute, as is the “conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or free speech in connection” with an issue of public concern.
- Recording Howard in a parking lot the day after his resignation from office is lawful newsgathering activity as there’s no expectation of privacy (in a convertible) in a parking lot.
- The Sandersville Police Officer who responded to the Howard’s campaign event is captured on body camera telling the Howard’s that Johnson’s conduct was legal.
- Howard was not placed in reasonable fear and Johnson’s conduct was not illegitimate.
“But annoyance, embarrassment, and unwanted scrutiny are not stalking. Nor may a public official punish scrutiny by claiming that it scares him.”
Fleischman’s Motion also cited a 2024 Georgia Court of Appeals case in which the courts ruled that a public official could not claim reasonable fear of being filmed in public places by a constituent.
Attorneys for Howard argued they could not respond to the anti-SLAPP motion on such short notice, prompting Judge Smith to order an extension of the TPO due to its expiration on April 27. The hearing was scheduled for May 7.
Read the Motion to Strike under the anti-SLAPP statute filed by Fleischman, which includes Howard’s Consent Agreement with the Prosecution Attorneys Qualification Commission, his resignation letter, and the Report of Disposition.
Order to Record Proceedings Denied
On April 2, TheGeorgiaVirtue submitted a Rule 22 request to record the April 21 proceedings for newsgathering purposes.
No party objected to the request, but a hearing was held with attorneys for Howard and Johnson on April 17. Judge Smith ultimately denied the request to use recording devices, but said a laptop for notetaking and an iPhone for still photos would be permitted. Among the considerations cited in the Order:
- “Photographs will sufficiently promote public access and openness”
- “Photogrpahs will show the true actions of the court without the potential sensualization that live recordings may cause.”
- “Live recordings may cause damage to the Petitioner and further the interests of the alleged perpetrator.”
- “Any distractions..may impact the due process of the proceedings by distracting the parties or sensualizing the case, not allowing for either party to be heard in a fair manner.”
- “Courtroom access will still be open to all members of the public…Any member of the public is free to attend the hearing..and to obtain a copy of the transcript of the proceedings*”
*Transcripts require a per-page cost due to the court reporter and are not available until a request is made to the court reporter and a transcription is produced.
With the assistance of the First Amendment Clinic at the University of Georgia, TheGeorgiaVirtue filed an emergency motion seeking review by the Georgia Court of Appeals.
While the Court of Appeals opted not to take up the emergency motion prior to Thursday’s hearing, the appeal will continue on as the courts have long held that these matters can be decided, even if moot for the actual issue, because the risk of re-injury remains.
Thursday’s Hearing
Thursday’s hearing before Judge Smith will first address the Motion to Strike under Georgia’s anti-SLAPP statute. Smith will determine if the action should be dismissed or should proceed. If Johnson prevails in the anti-SLAPP proceeding, a hearing will not take place on protective order. If Judge Smith rules in favor of Howard, the hearing on the extension of the protective order for a period of twelve months will follow.
Check back to TheGeorgiaVirtue.com for updates.
