In Franklin v. Benevolent etc. Order of Elks (1979) 97 Cal.App.3d 915, defendant Elks association was sued by plaintiff school teacher. She had selected parts of a book which was a "pastiche of underground writings concerning revolution, sex and drugs, vividly illustrated and replete with vulgar language," ( id. at p. 919) for use in her high school classroom. The defendant organization wrote and published an editorial in its own magazine strongly criticizing the book and its use as instructional material. The editorial reported that the teacher had been dismissed from another school system and opined that she was not the sort of teacher that anyone wanted teaching in our school system. In the defense of the ensuing libel action, the defendants moved for summary judgment based on the contention that the teacher could not establish as an essential element of her case i.e., that the alleged libels were published with actual malice; that she as a public official and public figure was required to establish such malice. The court summarily rejected the assertion that a school teacher was a public official. As to the question of whether the teacher had been a public figure, the court said: "In our view the definition of 'public figure' which has evolved from Butts through Gertz, Firestone and Wolston incorporates as an element a requirement that the libel plaintiff must have voluntarily and actively sought, in connection with any given matter of public interest, to influence the resolution of the issues involved. To us it seems clear that only by such voluntary and active participation could an individual be said to have 'relinquished . . . his interest in the protection of his own name.'" ( Id. at p. 929.) Thus the teacher was held not to be a public figure.