Chandra Law Logo

Court dismisses defamation suit against Orange Village resident, using Ohio’s new “Anti-SLAPP” free-speech law

Wednesday, December 10, 2025

Cuyahoga County Judge rules developer Randy Kertesz’s lawsuit against homeowner Dr. Rajesh Pidikiti fails to state a viable claim; orders Kertesz to pay attorney fees and costs.

Court dismisses defamation suit against Orange Village resident, using Ohio’s new “Anti-SLAPP” free-speech law
Randy Kertesz v. Dr. Rajesh Pidikiti defamation case: Kertesz lost and Dr. Pidikiti's free-speech rights were protected. (Photo used under fair use.)

CLEVELAND, OH—Today, in a historic and significant victory for free speech and public participation, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas dismissed a purported defamation lawsuit filed by developer Randy Kertesz (pronounced “CURTIS”) against Orange Village resident Dr. Rajesh Pidikiti (pronounced rah-JAYSH pih-DIH-kit-tee).

The court granted Dr. Pidikiti’s Motion for Expedited Relief under Ohio’s newly enacted Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), effectively stopping what is known as a SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). It is believed to be the first such decision under the new statute in Cuyahoga County and among the first in Ohio.

The court dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it can never be refiled. As the new statute mandates, Kertesz must now pay Dr. Pidikiti’s reasonable attorney fees, court costs, and expenses.

Background

The dispute arose after Dr. Pidikiti spoke during the public-comment portion of an October 2024 Orange Village Council meeting to oppose a new phase of a Kertesz-backed development. Dr. Pidikiti expressed concerns about the development's impact on residents and described feeling harassed by Kertesz, who then served as president of the Homeowners’ Association (HOA). Dr. Pidikiti later spoke to the Cleveland Jewish News, allegedly expressing an opinion that he felt that Kertesz was a racist and noting that Kertesz had threatened lawsuits.

In August 2025, Kertesz sued Dr. Pidikiti for defamation.

The Chandra Law Firm LLC swiftly moved for expedited dismissal under UPEPA (R.C. 2747.01 et seq.), a law that went into effect on April 9, 2025 and is designed to protect individuals from meritless lawsuits intended to chill free speech.

Legal rulings

In a December 10, 2025 opinion, Visiting Judge William T. McGinty, sitting for Judge Deborah Turner, found that Dr. Pidikiti’s speech was protected and made several critical findings strengthening Ohio’s free-speech protections:

  • UPEPA is retroactive: In a major ruling on the scope of the new law, the Court rejected Kertesz’s argument that UPEPA did not apply to speech made before the statute’s effective date. The Court ruled that UPEPA is procedural and applies to any claim asserted after the effective date, ensuring broad protection for defendants.

  • Protection of public speech: The Court affirmed that the comments made at the Orange Village Council meeting and to a newspaper about the development project were matters of public concern protected by UPEPA.

  • Accusation of being a “racist” is non-defamatory opinion: Regarding Dr. Pidikiti’s alleged statement to the press that he felt Kertesz was “a racist,” the Court ruled that, under the totality of the circumstances, the comment was constitutionally protected opinion, not a verifiable fact, and therefore not defamatory as a matter of law.

  • Saying someone made “threats of lawsuits” is not defamation: The Court ruled that stating someone “threatened a lawsuit” is not defamatory, as threatening to use the legal system is subject to multiple interpretations and not inherently a bad-faith or frivolous act.

  • False allegation. The Court found that Kertesz falsely asserted that Dr. Pidikiti called him a racist at an Orange Village Council meeting—something Kertesz doubled down on after Chandra Law provided both a link to the YouTube video on the Orange Village Council's channel and a full transcript of Dr. Pidikiti’s words, which the Court repeated in its opinion. Chandra Law warned Kertesz’s counsel to withdraw that provably false allegation from the complaint. But he didn’t.

Subodh Chandra, Dr. Pidikiti’s lead counsel, issued the following statement:

This historic ruling is a triumph for every Ohioan who wishes to speak truth to power without fear of financial ruin. Mr. Kertesz tried to use the legal system to silence a resident who dared to speak out at a city council meeting and to the media about a matter of public concern. Ohio’s new UPEPA statute worked exactly as intended: it exposed this lawsuit as meritless, shut it down quickly, and shifted the financial burden back to the (in our opinion) bully who filed it. We are thrilled for Dr. Pidikiti, who stood his ground to protect his First Amendment rights—including his right to express his opinion about racism.

“This is a great start. We can’t wait to shut down more efforts to quash free speech,” Chandra’s colleague Emily Bohatch, a former journalist, added. “People shouldn’t be filing meritless lawsuits attacking free-speech rights every time they have their feelings hurt over others expressing opinions about their behavior.”

“This is an example of the Streisand effect,” Chandra concluded. “If Kertesz had simply accepted Dr. Piditiki’s free-speech rights to express his opinion, Kertesz wouldn’t have generated a historic legal ruling that draws even more attention to Dr. Pidikiti’s allegedly expressed opinion about alleged racism.”

The term “Streisand effect” refers to the controversy generated when the actress and singer Barbara Streisand opposed publication of aerial photos of her Malibu estate. It refers to the phenomenon that occurs when someone tries to hide or suppress information, but doing so ends up drawing far more public attention. Efforts to muzzle critics, force content removal, or threaten lawsuits can unintentionally amplify the very thing someone wants to bury. Such efforts often backfire in the digital age.

Chandra Law will now seek to recover from Kertesz Dr. Pidikiti’s attorney fees and costs.

The legal team for Dr. Pidikiti includes Subodh Chandra, Alex Lavelle, and Emily Bohatch of The Chandra Law Firm LLC.

The case is captioned Kertesz v. Pidikiti, Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-25-122630. Kertesz was represented by attorney Brian Green.

About The Chandra Law Firm LLC

The Chandra Law Firm LLC is a boutique civil-rights and constitutional-law firm based in Cleveland, Ohio, known for holding public officials, powerful people, and institutions accountable.

Chandra Law is experienced obtaining justice for victims of First Amendment violations. We also secure other constitutional rights.

And the firm helped pioneer work in holding individuals and companies accountable for
civil liability for criminal acts, securing the two leading Supreme Court of Ohio decisions favorable to crime victims on the topic.

If you think that your rights have been violated, you may
contact us to discuss your options.


At Chandra Law, your case is our cause®.

Related Practice Areas
First AmendmentFirst Amendment RetaliationFree Speech for California Public Employees: Where the Line Is DrawnCalifornia’s Anti-SLAPP StatuteOhio’s Anti-SLAPP Statute
Tags
racismrajesh-pidikitiupeparandy-kerteszanti-slappuniform-public-expression-protection-act-(upepa)free-speechracistfirst-amendment

Making the right choice in legal representation can make the difference in whether you achieve a result that protects your legal rights and best interests.

Tell Us About Your Case