Perspective
Aug. 4, 2016
Anti-SLAPP statute straightened out by state high court
When a single, otherwise-valid, SLAPP cause of action includes allegations of protected activities, these activities may be excised and the case may move forward, under a new California Supreme Court opinion. By Gary A. Watt
Gary A. Watt
Partner
Hanson Bridgett LLP
State Bar Approved, Certified Appellate Specialist
Email: gwatt@hansonbridgett.com
Gary chairs Hanson Bridgett's Appellate Practice. He is a State Bar-approved, certified appellate specialist. In addition to writs and appeals, his practice includes anti-SLAPP and post-trial motions as well as trial and appellate consulting. His blog posts can be read at www.appellateinsight.com.
The California Supreme Court has issued another opinion in the ever expanding universe of case law involving the state's anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16. In Baral v. Schnitt, 2016 DJDAR 7799 (Aug. 1, 2016), the court resolved a dilemma plaguing the trial and appellate courts: whether the SLAPP statute "authorize[s] a trial court to excise allegations of activity protected under the statute when t...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In