O’Flynn v. BeyondChron, Case No. A131481 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 22, 2012) (Unpublished).
In this one, plaintiff got SLAPPed by two defendants–a subsidiary newspaper and writer employed by parent Tenderloin–in a defamation and false light lawsuit. Defendants were then awarded attorney’s fees under the mandatory SLAPP fee-shifting statute of $21,326.18. Plaintiff appealed, claiming that parent Tenderloin’s in-house attorney representing the successful defendants was akin to a pro per attorney under the Trope v. Katz prohibition. (See our category “SLAPP” to get the gist of this rule.) Although the appellate court acknowledged that in-house counsel work is compensable and that internal attorney work by associates not representing separate interests from a law firm likely is not compensable, the facts below showed that the parent in-house attorneys were not protecting parent Tenderloin’s interest, because it was not named in the suit. Rather, its protection of subsidiary newspaper and its writer still meant fees were recoverable, especially given the lack of proof to show the parent was an alter ego of the subsidiary.
Rahavi v. Newport Capital Recovery Group II, LLC, Case No. G045582 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 22, 2012) (Unpublished).
The second case was one where defendant lost a SLAPP motion, and the trial court awarded $3,300 in attorney’s fees to plaintiff based on the fee-shifting provision allowing the defense to recoup when a frivolous SLAPP motion is brought. Plaintiff, upset at this development, appealed and protested there was no explicit determination of frivolousness. After determining that the case involved a business dispute over nonprotected activity which predominated for SLAPP purposes, the appellate court–in a 3-0 opinion by Presiding Justice O’Leary–found that there was at least an implicit finding of frivolousness in the business dispute determination and in the trial court’s comments warning that the fee award could even have been higher if the matter continued on for an unprotected SLAPP dispute. Bad news for plaintiff is that the defendant will get costs on appeal, which includes more SLAPP fees for winning the appeal.