Cases: SLAPP

However, As Against One Defendant, SLAPP Fees Not Allowable On Plaintiff’s Intentional Infliction Of Emotion Distress Claim.             In Astre v. McQuaid, Case No. A154945 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 31, 2019) (unpublished), defendants filed a SLAPP motion against plaintiff’s state court complaint, with plaintiff choosing to voluntarily dismiss it without prejudice and seeking relief […]

Plaintiff Real Estate Developer Failed To Provide The 4th District With Any Evidence That The Award Was Excessive Or Biased.             In SCPB Holdings v. Taggett, Case No. D074991 (4th Dist., Div. 1 October 25, 2019) (unpublished), plaintiff real estate developer sued defendant and others for contractual interference and defamation, among other claims, after a

Appellate Court Had No Problem With $9,000 SLAPP Request For 24 Hours Of Work.             Just to show you that abuse of discretion is not an unlimited deferential standard of review, we post on Kohanbash v. Specialty Baking, Inc., Case No. B283117 (2d Dist., Div. 1 July 1, 2019) (unpublished).  What happened in this case

Trial Court Would Have Granted SLAPP Prior To Dismiss, Such That Amendment Nuanced Argument Did Not Change The Result.             In Contreras v. Contreras, Case No. G056710 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 25, 2019) (unpublished), a plaintiff dismissed a slander title cause of action while a SLAPP motion was pending although the trial court would

$28,795.70 In Fees Went Away Because SLAPP Motion Was Not Frivolous.             In Rudisill v. California Coastal Commission (Xingyun, LLC), Case No. B289179 (2d Dist., Div. 2 June 5, 2019) (published), Real Parties were interested in a development project in Venice brought by certain petitioners against the Coastal Commission and City of Los Angeles.  Real

SLAPP Fee Motion Entertainable During Appeal Of Merits SLAPP Grant.            Plaintiff, a political cartoonist and blogger, sued certain defendants for certain tort claims (including defamation), with defendants successfully SLAPP-ing the case, which carries mandatory fee recovery. Although plaintiff appealed the merits in an earlier appeal, the appellate court concluded that the SLAPP grant was successful.