Perspective
Jan. 11, 2017
Anti-SLAPP protection shouldn't be limited to unlimited case
Restricting the use of a powerful and economical defensive tool to only those engaged in higher stakes litigation discriminates against limited jurisdiction litigants whose constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition are no less valuable. By Aaron J. Weissman and Farhad Novian




Aaron J. Weissman
R.J. Ryan Law APCPhone: 818-956-2407
Email: aaron@rjryanlaw.com
Univ of West Los Angeles; Los Angeles CA
There have been countless recent decisions regarding the reach of Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16, which provides for an expedited procedure for dismissing lawsuits filed to inhibit the exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition. Regardless whether a matter is valued at greater or less than $25,000, a plaintiff's heinous conduct in pursuing improper, baseless and malicious ...
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