PRETRIAL ADJUDICATION
...Motion to Strike
......Special Motion to Strike
.........Protected Activity
62 Cards On This Topic:

Employer's actions plaintiff alleged in his discrimination and retaliation claims may qualify as protected speech or petitioning activity under CCP §425.16.

Though GC §1090 conflict of interest and disgorgement case against councilmembers not covered by anti-SLAPP exemption for public enforcement actions, votes cast in favor of the contract were protected activity under CCP §425.16.

Action based on D's counterclaims in prior, unrelated proceeding in federal court, arose from activity protected by CCP 425.16; remand required to see if Ps established probability of prevailing.

Hospital's statements regarding physician were protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute because they were made in connection with its peer review process.

Statements concerning artist identity on an album cover and in a promotional video for a posthumous Michael Jackson album were noncommercial speech entitled to protection under the anti-SLAPP statute.

Anti-SLAPP motion improperly denied as to plaintiff's breach of contract and fraud action where defendants' affirmative acts in connection with producing an incomplete film furthered their free speech rights.

Suit by husband's estate did not arise out of the protected litigation activity of W's estate where it concerned a failure of W's estate to honor an indemnification agreement.

A defendant's celebrity status by itself did not convert a private dispute involving the defendant into a matter of public interest under the anti-SLAPP statute.

The anti-SLAPP statute protects the disbursement of settlement monies in a litigation.

Anti-SLAPP motion properly granted where union demonstrated a probability of prevailing on its claims where defendant sent a letter to its employees attempting to influence their decision to join union.

Series of newspaper articles regarding the source of political campaign expenditures were entitled to anti-SLAPP protection.

Because statements made during internal investigations authorized by statute formed the basis of P's defamation cause of action, that claim arose from protected activity.

Plaintiff could not demonstrate a probability of success on the merits of his defamation claim where defendants' statements were protected by the litigation privilege.

Homeowners association's act of entering into a settlement agreement afforded anti-SLAPP protection.

Anti-SLAPP statute applied to plaintiff-employer's breach of arbitration contracts claim where it arose from defendant-employee's refusal to submit to arbitration and filing of a putative class action complaint.

Regional air quality management district's civil enforcement action against plaintiff was protected by anti-SLAPP statute as petitioning activity.

Statements concerning artist identity on an album cover and in a promotional video for a posthumous Michael Jackson album were noncommercial speech entitled to protection under the anti-SLAPP statute.

The anti-SLAPP exemption for commercial speech did not apply where the trial ct. found defendant-attorneys had no intent to solicit in giving an interview to a trade publication regarding their clients' settlement of a case against plaintiff.

Office of Inspector General's investigation of alleged inmate abuse protected by anti-SLAPP statute.

Because the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. is not a public entity, a complaint to it is not protected by the anti-SLAPP statute.

An internal investigation of a county counsel's wrongdoing, which led to an accusation being filed against him pursuant to GC §27641, was an official proceeding entitled to anti-SLAPP protection.

The definition of public interest under the anti-SLAPP statute includes private conduct that impacts a broad segment of society or a community.

Defendants' statements against golf course development were not commercial speech exempted from protection by the anti-SLAPP statute.

When plaintiff's complaint itself alleges activity protected by the anti-SLAPP statute, the moving party may rely on these allegations alone; pre-litigation conduct protected by statute.

Anti-SLAPP statute applicable to P's claims for breach of contract against Individual Ds where city was contracting party and Individual Ds were acting on behalf of city; statute also applicable to negligent misrepresentation claims.

Under the first prong of anti-SLAPP analysis, private homeowners association's quasi-governmental activities related to county land use planning were constitutionally protected activity under CCP §425.16(e)(4).

••All•• communicative acts performed by attorneys in their representation of a client in a judicial proceeding, or other petitioning context, are protected by the anti-SLAPP statute.

Government agency's letters to waste water treatment plant stating that it was violating state hazardous waste regulations were protected activity under anti-SLAPP analysis.

County's termination of a whistleblower is not protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute.

Petitioning while trespassing on private property directly adjacent to store entryway is not protected by the anti-SLAPP statute.

A petition alleging violation of a trust's no contest clause that arises from a pleading filed with the probate court is subject to the anti-SLAPP statute.

The principal thrust, or gravamen, of a plaintiff's cause of action determines whether the cause of action arises from protected activity to which the anti-SLAPP statute applies.

D's statements made in bankruptcy proceedings protected by anti-SLAPP statute.

Anti-SLAPP statute protects not only speech, but also conduct in the furtherance of speech.

Anti-SLAPP motion properly granted where Ds' recording of judgment lien was protected activity and P could not allege, much less show, that D violated debt collection laws.

D's anti-SLAPP motion improperly denied as to P's claims of defamation, false light, and public disclosure of private facts where based on D's substantially true statements that P had an abortion and plastic surgery.

UC did not sustain burden to show the gravamen of P's claims for sexual harassment and retaliation arose from its protected 1st Amendment activity of written complaints made in connection with an official proceeding.

Video-recording of an unseemly private brawl, no matter how widely distributed, is far removed from a citizen's constitutional right of petition or free speech involving a public issue; Ds' anti-SLAPP motion properly denied.

Filing of meritless cross-complaint against attorney seeking fees is not a protected activity warranting anti-SLAPP protection.

D's frivolous special motion to strike denied where unlawful detainer clearly arose out of D's unprotected activity in not paying rent, not out of its protected petitioning activity in filing a prior lawsuit against landlord.

CCP 425.16 is generally inapplicable to claims seeking to impose liability based on atty's violation of Rules Prof. Conduct conflict of interest rules or other attorney actions taken on a client's behalf.

D's anti-SLAPP motion properly denied where his false, libelous and harassing statements about a fellow academic's work did not concern important public interests nor arise from protected activity.

Peace officer's execution of a warrant is not protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute; it is not an exercise of rights by the officer, but the performance of a mandatory duty, at the court's direction.

Pastor acting as religious expert was not a limited purpose public figure for purpose of defamation claims and strike motion as he did not thrust himself into a public controversy about child abuse, child molestation, tax evasion or theft.

Because law firm's withdrawal of settlement funds w/out insurer's consent was neither communicative nor related to an issue of public interest, firm's anti-SLAPP motion properly denied.

Declaratory relief action filed in response to attorney's letters threatening litigation over a contract dispute does not come within the provisions of CCP §425.16.

Special motion to strike reversed as none of P's C/As arose from D's filing of termination notice or unlawful detainer, but from conduct by D that occurred during P’s tenancy or in connection with its termination.

Error to grant D's special motion to strike where Ps' conversion and fraudulent conveyance C/As did not arise out of D's settlement of litigation, and thus was not protected activity.

As paper's refusal to take comments concerning P from its website arose from its acts in furtherance of its free speech rights, its anti-SLAPP motion properly granted.

In anti-SLAPP case, trial ct. properly struck the allegations in X-complaint that attacked the protected activity and allowed the unprotected theories to remain.

Error to grant Ds' special motion to strike where gravamen of P's action was allegation Ds wrongfully bought P's confidential documents, which was not an act by Ds in furtherance of their right of petition or free speech.

Attys' motion to dismiss per CCP 425.16 should have been granted where their only connection to Ps’ claims stemmed from their representation of bank in unlawful detainer actions; protected and unprotected activity.

Under Benasra, Freeman, and their progeny, an attorney's breach of fiduciary duties owed to a current or former client does not constitute protected speech or petitioning within the meaning of CCP 425.16.

Anti-SLAPP motion reversed where 3-day notice to quit might have been the trigger, but the complaint was actually based on an underlying dispute over repair and maintenance obligations under a sublease and other unprotected activities.

Deputy sheriff's C/A against ex-W, alleging stmts she made to internal affairs breached settlement agrmt., should have been stricken where her actions were based on protected activity and litigation privilege applied.

Homeowners' special motion to strike slander of title complaint properly granted where their recording of lis pendens was protected and no probability of Ps prevailing—forged deed of trust void and CC 47(b) privilege applied.

Error to deny CBS's anti-SLAPP motion where P acted as a public official for purposes of defamation law and failed to show CBS's report was made with actual malice.

As Ds accused of filing false claims and capping did not make prima facie showing that their conduct arose from protected acts of petitioning or speech, anti-SLAPP statute did not apply.

Orders striking P's cross-complaint against attys. for equitable indemnity reversed where claim was essentially for atty. malpractice and thus did not involve activity protected by anti-SLAPP statute.

As the gravamen of P’s complaint for wrongful removal from board of nonprofit foundation did not implicate protected activity, order granting foundation's special motion to strike was reversed.

Ex-employee's anti-SLAPP motion improperly denied where his Craigslist postings about Bank arose from act in furtherance of free speech right re "issue of public interest" and Bank did not show probability of success.

Candidate's statements about P were protected activity where made in a public forum at a HOA's annual meeting and concerned an issue of public interest — qualifications of a candidate for office.