A lawyer for the St. Charles District 303 teachers union is asking a judge to dismiss a $100,00 defamation claim from a Campton Hills mortgage attorney, asserting that the complaint is retaliatory and intended to “chill the other party’s rights,” court records show.

Attorney Larry Bettag sued the St. Charles Education Association and its president, Jennifer Adam on March 27, stating the union’s complaint to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission and a news release about it were both defamatory and damaged his legal standing in the community.

Bettag’s complaint seeks more than $50,000 from both the union and Adam.

Their complaint and the news release asserted that Bettag engaged in “deliberate misinformation” in connection with a flyer circulated before the April 1, 2025, consolidated election.

The union’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss the complaint May 18, asserting that the union’s statements in a news release about the ARDC complaint – which Bettag claims are defamatory – are actually true.

“The Plaintiff targets statements ... that are backed up by supporting evidence and are, on the face of the complaint and the exhibits attached to it, true,” according to the court filing. “The Complaint admits that Plaintiff is associated with Kane County Speaks, and that Kane County Speaks created the flyer.”

The issue had to do with the teachers union endorsements for the school board and a competing flyer from Kane County Speaks listing four candidates that “St. Charles D303 Educators Endorse,” when only one of them was.

The flyer in question listed incumbents Heidi J. Fairgrieve and Thomas Lentz and newcomers Antonietta Berton-Nicklaus and Elias Palacios as being endorsed by District 303 educators.

Fairgrieve was actually endorsed by the union, along with Kate Bell, Jenna Hancock and Kimberly Rich, which they stated in their flyers and signs.

The teachers union’s characterization of the flyers as “disinformation” is an “objectively verifiable fact rather than an opinion ... that characterization is shown from the face of the complaint to be substantially true,” according to the court filing.

Also at issue is the language Kane County Speaks used in its flyers, “D303 Educators Endorse.” That is a phrase that the teachers union used for years to publicize their candidate endorsements, according to the union’s complaint to the ARDC and the motion to dismiss.

Bettag’s complaint “admits that the flyers do not represent the opinions of all of District 303’s educators, but only ‘several educators who were employed at that time by District 303,’” according to the court filing.

“However, the flyer does not include this caveat, instead leading voters to believe that Defendants made the same endorsements as Kane County Speaks,” according to the motion seeking to dismiss the lawsuit. “It is verifiably true that the flyers distributed by Kane County Speaks would tend to mislead the public about the Defendants’ endorsements for the April 1, 2025 School Board Election.”

The union’s court filing also asserted that Bettag’s complaint is a SLAPP, an acronym for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.

The motion cited the Illinois Citizen Participation Act, and described SLAPP lawsuits as an “abuse of the judicial process, and have been used as a means of “intimidating, harassing, or punishing citizens and organizations ... for involving themselves in public affairs.”

“The lawsuit seeks to curtail future attempts by Defendants to communicate with voters, and pave the way for Plaintiff, and the group with which he associates, to mislead the public without correction,” according to the motion to dismiss.

Bettag’s attorney, Patrick Walsh, challenged the motion to dismiss.

“The ‘gist’ of Defendants’ ARDC complaint and press release was not that Kane County Speaks created the fliers generally,” Walsh wrote in an email.

“Rather, the statements were targeted attacks on Mr. Bettag as an individual and his fitness to practice law, when none of the activities they alleged he committed were remotely connected to the practice of law,” Walsh’s email stated. “The Defendants are simply projecting to the extent they claim Mr. Bettag’s lawsuit was retaliatory, or a ‘SLAPP’ lawsuit. Ironically, it was the Defendants’ ARDC complaint and press release that targeted Mr. Bettag based on his alleged participation in the political process, not the other way around.”

The ARDC website about complaints and answers does not list anything about Bettag.

The next court date for the case is June 16, court records show.