Mark Egger’s $5,000 Civil Defamation Case Against Stevi and Cameron Hubbard Dismissed – But is That The End?

After counsel Jeremiah Egger rested the plaintiff’s case in his client, and father, Mark Egger’s $5,000 civil defamation suit against Stevi Hubbard and her daughter Cameron Thursday morning in Warren County General District Court, defense counsel Phillip Griffin rose to argue for dismissal of the civil claims action. Griffin told Judge Christopher E. Collins there was not enough substantive evidence presented by the plaintiff to continue the civil, small claims court case.

In addition to a preponderance of personal opinions on what the photo-shopped graphic at the center of the defamation claim presented, as well as the submission of plaintiff exhibits without the presence of the authors of that evidence related to the criminal investigation undertaken at the request of plaintiff Egger or his witnesses, defense counsel zeroed in on his key point. That point was no plaintiff evidence submitted of document-able damages suffered by Mark Egger as a result of the Hubbards’ believed circulation of a photo-shopped graphic of Egger in a light-colored, hooded robe.

Plaintiff Mark Egger and several other plaintiff witnesses described the superimposed garb as a “KKK” robe. Egger’s civil claim for $5,000 in damages was based on the circulation of the graphic on vehicles parked at a Samuels Public Library Board of Directors meeting in 2023 during the CleanUp Samuels Library (CSL) movement to remove LGBTQ-themed books from the library, particularly its children’s section. Both Egger and the Hubbards were involved in that library material dispute on opposing sides, Egger for removal, the Hubbards in support of maintaining the LGBTQ-themed material under guidelines established by library staff and board of directors members.

After hearing both sides argue for or against dismissal, Judge Collins recessed court for what he estimated as a 10-minute break to ponder what he had heard and relevant case law precedents. Fifteen minutes later he returned to court and granted the defense’s dismissal motion, citing a lack of any evidence of financial or personal harm to the plaintiff as a result of the Hubbards alleged actions surrounding circulation of the photo-shopped graphic of Egger.

The Hubbards and supporters leave the WC Courthouse following the dismissal of the $5,000 civil defamation claim brought against them by Mark Egger. Royal Examiner Photos Roger Bianchini

Referencing plaintiff witness testimony in response to questions about how the flyer placed on Library parking lot car windshields during a Library Board of Directors meeting attended by both Egger and the Hubbards impacted their perception of Egger, Judge Collins observed, “All I heard was ‘If I didn’t know Mr. Egger, maybe’ — I’ve seen no evidence this flyer harmed his reputation.” The judge also noted that “I may have lost some sleep over this” did not meet the case law damages standard.

As previously reported surrounding earlier hearings in the case last year, Mark Egger claimed the circulated graphic he attributed to the Hubbards portrayed him as a KKK-dressed person, implying violent support of anti-black racism. Such a portrayal had negatively impacted his personal credibility and possibly cost him lost piano students due to the racist caricature, Egger asserted.

However, the Hubbards said and presented graphic support that the robed outfit superimposed on an image of Mark Egger, rather than a KKK reference, was of a hooded “Capirote” uniform once more commonly donned by European Catholics, particularly in Spanish areas, as part of an Easter season repentance for one’s sins ritual dating back as far as the Spanish Inquisition era. Egger, like many in the CSL movement, is a self-identified Catholic with background connections to Christendom College and/or St. John the Baptist Catholic Church in Front Royal.

One of a number of online photos of the referenced hooded “Capirote” uniforms once more commonly donned by European Catholics, particularly in Spanish areas at least as late as the 1960s, as part of an Easter season repentance ritual dating to the Spanish Inquisition era. Below, Mark Egger speaking at a county supervisors meeting during the CleanUp Samuels Library effort last year that led up to this civil litigation. Cameron Hubbard is viewing with camcorder held up from second row seat just to speakers’ left.

In fact, defense cross-examination questions: “You were involved with the Clean Up Samuels effort for some time, weren’t you?” (“Not true” Egger quickly replied) and “You’re a member of the Catholic Church?” both brought objections from plaintiff counsel, as to relevance.

After the judge’s ruling for dismissal while leaving the courtroom, plaintiff Mark Egger, who has declined to speak to this reporter following earlier hearings, handed me a printed note, saying, “This is my comment.” Appearing to address the above-referenced CSL Samuels Library book removal controversy he had appeared to support in public comments to elected bodies, that piece of paper read: “There is no such thing as ‘transgender’. A boy cannot become a girl, and a girl cannot become a boy.”

On the defense side, Stevi and Cameron Hubbard let their attorney, Phillip Griffin, speak for them. “We’re glad that the judge made the proper decision and we’re relieved, the Hubbards have been under a fair amount of stress for the last nine months or so, since this originated,” Griffin observed. Defense counsel also addressed potential follow-up actions in the wake of Judge Collins dismissal of the civil claims against his clients.

From left, Cameron and Stevi Hubbard were all smiles with attorney Phillip Griffin after dismissal of Mark Egger’s $5,000 civil claim of defamation against them.

“The Virginia Code says that if you are successful in defending a 1st Amendment case, which is a defamation of character, freedom of speech-type case, that you may recover all your attorneys fees. And so we are going to decide when and where the appropriate time to make that request is. It’s clear that the judge did not want to address that issue today. So, we’ll have to come back on another date,” Griffin explained.

It was asked if that implied additional litigation related to this case. “So, the judge made the comment that if you accuse somebody of a crime and it turns out they didn’t do it, then you can get opened up to a defamation case. And as you heard from the evidence, there was a request that a law enforcement investigation be opened up directed towards the Hubbards, both of them,” Griffin noted, adding, “And that’s something we’ll consider when we make the claim for attorney’s fees.”