| California’s anti-SLAPP statute is a powerful tool. It allows the trial court to dismiss a plaintiff’s claims very early, if the claims arise from an act in furtherance of the rights of petition or free speech in connection with a public issue, unless the plaintiff can show a probability of success.. There’s been an explosion of anti-SLAPP rulings in recent years, and many of those rulings make their way to the appellate courts. GMSR has successfully handled anti-SLAPP appeals addressing an array of issues. |
Representative cases are highlighted below. Click on red case names for more information, including our briefs and the court's opinion. For a complete list of cases in this practice area, click on the "All Cases" link in the sidebar.
Aguilar v. Goldstein (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 1152
Breach of fiduciary duty claim not barred by anti-SLAPP statute, because it did not “arise from” earlier lawsuit filed by defendants
Kent L. Richland
Price v. Stossel (9th Cir. 2010) 620 F.3d 992
Ninth Circuit holds that district court erred in dismissing GMSR’s client’s express defamation claim against ABC on anti-SLAPP grounds.
Robert A. Olson
Ruttlen v. County of Los Angeles (2009) 2009 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5406
Anti-SLAPP law covers public officials’ statements to press and Board of Supervisors; protected by official-duty, official proceeding and common-interest privileges
Martin Stein
, Alison M. Turner
Gallanis-Politis v. Medina, et al. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 600
Court of Appeal reverses the denial of GMSR’s client’s anti-SLAPP motion with directions to grant the motion and award attorneys’ fees and costs to GMSR’s client
Martin Stein
[ Practice Areas ]
|
|
|
