Larry Johnson v. Shimshon Wexler

── Larry Johnson v. Shimshon Wexler ── Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia Date: June 04, 2026 Category: General SECOND DIVISION DOYLE, P. J., DAVIS, J., AND SENIOR JUDGE FULLER NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules June 4, 2026 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A26A0395. JOHNSON v. WEXLER. FULLER, Senior Judge. In this action for defamation and related claims, plaintiff Larry Johnson appeals from the trial court’s order awarding attorney fees under Georgia’s anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (“anti-SLAPP”) statute, OCGA § 9-11-11.1. For the reasons explained more fully below, we affirm. This Court previously affirmed the trial court’s order striking Johnson’s claims against Shimshon Wexler, Jeffrey Cordtz, and Richard Alembik pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute. Johnson v. Cordtz, 366 Ga. App. 87, 92 (878 SE2d 603) (2022). The anti-SLAPP statute allows a defendant to move to strike a frivolous lawsuit filed to punish the exercise of free speech. Id. at 87. By way of background, Johnson is an attorney, and he represented a creditor in a debt-collection matter. Id. In April 2021, Johnson sent a letter to both Cordtz, a debtor of one of Johnson’s clients, and Alembik, Cordtz’s attorney, demanding payment of the debt and warning of liability for Johnson’s fees. Id. Alembik consulted with Wexler, an attorney familiar with the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 USC § 1692 et seq., and thereafter sent a letter to Johnson alleging several FDCPA violations in the letter to Cordtz and Alembik. Id. at 87-88. Although Johnson ultimately withdrew his letter, Wexler filed a federal suit against him on behalf of Cordtz, again raising the alleged FDCPA violations. Johnson, 366 Ga. App. at 88. After the federal suit was filed, Johnson threatened to sue Alembik and Wexler unless they agreed to a settlement, including dismissal of the federal litigation.1 Id. When his demands were not met, Johnson, proceeding pro se, filed the instant suit against Wexler, Alembik, and Cordtz, seeking $4,000,000 in damages and alleging state law claims of defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, conspiracy, and tortious interference with business relations. Id. Wexler, who initially 1 Ultimately, a federal magistrate judge issued a final recommendation to grant, in part, Johnson’s motion for summary judgment, Cordtz v. Johnson Legal Offices, LLC, No. 1:21-cv-02003-MHC-LTW, 2022 WL 17908679 (ND Ga., Sept. 30, 2022), which was thereafter adopted by the district court. 2 represented himself, filed a motion to dismiss or strike Johnson’s complaint pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute. Id. Following a hearing, the trial court granted Wexler’s motion and struck all of Johnson’s claims against the three defendants. Id. at 89. Wexler thereafter filed a motion for attorney fees under the anti-SLAPP statute.2 Wexler attached his own affidavit, as well as statements setting forth the work he personally did for his defense, and an affidavit and statements from attorney Orion Webb, who also assisted with the litigation. However, before the trial court ruled on the initial request for fees, Johnson appealed the order striking his complaint. As set forth above, this Court affirmed the trial court’s order, holding that it properly determined that Johnson’s claims were barred by the anti-SLAPP statute. Johnson, 366 Ga. App. at 92(1). This Court also denied Johnson’s motion for reconsideration, id. at 93, and the Supreme Court of Georgia denied his subsequent petition for a writ of certiorari. See Case No. S23C0372 (June 21, 2023). Back in the trial cou