Carl Kanowsky, Esq.

In the recently published decision of Shanahan vs. State Farm, three seemingly diverse elements came together in a case where the justices had to be suppressing smiles in front of the public while busting a gut in private.

John Shanahan, the founder of Hooked on Phonics and friend to radio personality Dr. Laura, allegedly has a penchant for married women who work out.  In fact, he has such a yen for this type of female that he lost almost $2 million pursuing one.

Our boy, John, according to the opinion from the Court of Appeal, is married and has enough money to keep an attorney on staff full-time.  This attorney, Cheryl Skigin, is also married – just not to John, to his dismay.  While John denies all accusations, his later actions demonstrate a lack of conviction in the denial.

It seems that while Cheryl was at John’s house for a Christmas party, he grabbed a certain portion of her anatomy and exclaimed, “Hum, firm, must be all that horseback riding.”  Cheryl failed to respond as John had hoped.

John was not deterred.  He knew he could convince Cheryl he was everything she was looking for in a man.  So, confidently, he inquired, “Don’t you want to go away with me? Don’t you want me to (expletive deleted) your brains out? Isn’t that what you want?”  Amazingly, Cheryl was able to resist John’s charms and declined his eloquent invitation.

John is nothing if not persistent.  He took Cheryl on a business trip to Ireland, where he urged her to share an apartment with him.  When she rejected his entreaties, he sent flowers to her home (where her husband also lived) and enclosed a card that suggested a strong personal relationship – not something you’re supposed to get from your boss.

Cheryl got fed up and sued John.  He paid his attorneys about $1.2 million to defend him and eventually settled by paying $700,000 to Cheryl.  (If any of you know someone who wants to give me more than a million bucks to defend him, and then settle, please have him give me a call.)

Apparently John was feeling a little tapped out, as he asked State Farm, his renter’s insurer, to reimburse these dollars.  Amazingly, State Farm declined.  So he sued them.

John asserted there were theories under which he would have been covered by the insurance including negligence, slander and invasion of privacy.  His argument was that maybe he “negligently” played grab—, as opposed to doing it on purpose.  In reading the opinion, you could almost hear the justices guffaw.

“We fail to see how grabbing Skigin’s buttock, squeezing it, and telling her that its firmness must be the result of all her horseback riding, could have been accidental. …  One does not ‘accidentally’ tell a woman horseback riding has resulted in her having firm buttocks.”

Gasping for air, John then tried the argument that because he “touched” and propositioned Cheryl at a Christmas party in front of others, he was perhaps guilty of slander, so State Farm should pay up.

The problem?  No one saw John groping or heard him suggesting sexual congress, so there was no “publication,” a crucial element in any slander cause of action.

Flailing his arms, John begged the court to agree that sending flowers to Cheryl’s home was an invasion of her privacy.  The court summarily rejected this because John could offer no authority for this argument.

Then, as a final insult to John, the justices ordered him to reimburse State Farm for its costs on appeal.  Maybe a long horseback ride will give him some solace; it doesn’t look like anyone else will.

Carl Kanowsky is an attorney in Santa Clarita. He can be reached at cjk@kanowskylaw.com. Visit him online at www.kanowskylaw.com.