South Carolina school board member files libel lawsuits against parent, teacher’s husband over critical Facebook posts

---

A school board member sued a teacher and a Facebook page administrator for libel after they criticized him in several online posts. 

Key Players

Leslie Stiles, a parent of three children in the Lexington-Richland 5 school district, serves as the primary moderator for “Deep Dive Into D5,” a Facebook group she started in late 2020 to talk about the district schools with other parents.    

Ken Loveless, vice chair of the school board, owns Loveless Commercial Contracting, a construction company. He was elected to the board in 2018. 

Kevin Scully, the husband of a teacher in the school district, frequently posts on Stiles’s Facebook group.  

Further Details

On Facebook, Scully repeatedly criticized Loveless for his business relationship with Contract Construction, a company that was hired to build Piney Woods Elementary School in Chapin. For example, one post read, “crooked Ken is an unethical hypocrite and liar.” 

The Post and Courier reported that Loveless opposed Contract Construction’s project to build the school. But in 2020, Loveless Commercial Contracting was given more than $1 million to work with Contract Construction on a forensic lab for state law enforcement, leading other board members to raise concerns that the joint venture was a conflict of interest. In February 2021, Loveless recused himself from votes related to the elementary school project.

On Mar. 16, 2022, Loveless filed libel lawsuits against Stiles and Scully. Loveless accused Scully of making “numerous and repeated defamatory statements” about him. “The board seems to be more concerned with settling personal vendettas than taking care of our district,” Scully reportedly wrote.

Loveless claimed Stiles also made defamatory posts and “republished, thus ratifying and endorsing” posts from Scully and other members of the group as the page’s administrator. “Mr. Loveless participates in deliberations and attempts to use his position to influence decisions,” she reportedly wrote.

That day, the Facebook page was temporarily shut down, Stiles said. Loveless also subpoenaed at least nine individuals to give depositions, including a district teacher. Tucker Player, a lawyer representing three of the people subpoenaed, called the depositions a “fishing expedition” for what he referred to as a fallacious lawsuit, The State reported.

“This is a public official who has sued people for complaining about how he does his job,” Player said. “This was on a public forum where people made complaints about the school district they pay for, and he sued to shut it down.”

On April 21, witnesses gave their depositions. 

To win the lawsuit, Loveless must prove the comments by Stiles and Scully were false and made with malice. This means the defendants had to know “that the statements were not only false but that someone knew or should have known they were false at the time,” The Associated Press noted.

Outcome 

Stiles responds to the lawsuit

On Apr. 13, Stiles filed a response to the lawsuit in which she called the case “frivolous harassment” intended to “chill her speech and participation in matters of public concern.” Stiles’s lawyer said her comments are “opinions that are not actionable under the law of libel” and that Stiles cannot be held liable for posts made by other people on the Facebook page. 

Stiles’s filing also defended her actions under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which states that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” While larger companies like Facebook and Twitter typically use this section to protect themselves from being sued over content users post to their sites, Stiles argued Section 230 also applied to her as the Facebook group’s administrator and exempted her from liability over Scully’s comments. In other words, Stiles was a user who created a page where other users were allowed to post and comment. 

Stiles asked for a jury trial to award her damages for Loveless’s “perversion of the legal process.” The same day, Stiles posted that Loveless’ allegations “have no merit” on the Facebook group page.

“Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine that a public official would sue me for exercising my First Amendment right to speak about our public schools or for the things other people said in a Facebook group I created,” Stiles wrote.

State board files ethics complaint against Loveless

On July 11, 2022, the state ethics commission charged Loveless for failing to recuse himself early enough from the board’s work regarding Contract Construction. South Carolina law requires public officials to recuse themselves from participating in decisions about companies in which they have financial stakes, the Post and Courier reported.

According to the commission, Loveless violated the law four times: once when he asked about Contract Construction’s work on Piney Woods Elementary in a letter, twice while participating in the board’s decisions on the project, and once when he visited to evaluate the construction site.

Loveless’s hearing is set for February 16, 2023.

Scully announces school board election bid 

On Aug. 8, 2022, Scully posted on Facebook that he had filed to run in the local school board election in November 2022. The State reported that Scully is running in the Richland side of the district, while Loveless is seeking re-election in the Lexington side. According to board policy, four members must represent Lexington County and three must represent Richland County.

As of Sept. 19, 2022, there were no further updates.