Because Malicious Prosecution Cause of Action Can't Be Based On MFAA Arbitration, Defendant's Anti-SLAPP Motion Succeeds.
The California Court of Appeal holds that a malicious prosecution cause of action cannot rest on a mandatory fee arbitration act (MFAA) arbitration. Dorit v. Noe, A157433 (1/3 5/26/20) (Brown, Pollak, Tucher). As a result, the defendant/appellant's anti-SLAPP motion succeeds, because the plaintiff/respondent cannot prevail on his cause of action for malicious prosecution
Because the case is one of first impression, a key part of the reasoning is based on a policy decision that the interests promoted by allowing a malicious prosecution cause of action are not promoted by allowing the action to be based on an MFAA arbitration. The reasoning of the opinion is explained in co-contributor Marc's May 29, 2020 post on the California Mediation and Arbitration blawg.