For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court

Name Category Published
Peterson v. Zhang
Denial of motion for sanctions in underlying case did not trigger the interim adverse judgment rule to defeat malicious prosecution claim because it revealed nothing about the merits. 		Torts, Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Dec. 10, 2025
Noon v. Fuentes
Landlord who prosecuted unlawful detainer action was not protected against plaintiffs' wrongful eviction claims (for concealing the unlawful detainer action) by the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/4 Dec. 4, 2025
Onetaste Incorporated v. Netflix, Inc.
Wellness company failed its anti-SLAPP burden to show that Netflix published defamatory statements in its cult documentary. 		Anti-SLAPP, Torts 2DCA/3 Nov. 24, 2025
Willis v. The Walt Disney Company
Disney's alleged "booking ban" of The Village People fell within the scope of conduct protected by the catchall provision of California's anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/1 Nov. 6, 2025
Cocoa AJ Holdings, LLC v. Schneider
Trial court correctly granted anti-SLAPP motion where building management brought counterclaims against unit-owner for campaigning against amending Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/3 Nov. 5, 2025
Gopher Media LLC v. Melone
Orders denying motions to strike under California's anti-SLAPP statute are not immediately appealable and do not satisfy the requirements for an interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine. 		Anti-SLAPP 9th Oct. 10, 2025
Ahmed v. Collect Access, LLC
Because plaintiff's uncorroborated declaration denying residence and service was sufficient to show minimal merit, trial court's anti-SLAPP dismissal was erroneous. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/4 Oct. 7, 2025
Byrne v. Rule
Suit to enforce Brown Act closed-session confidentiality fell within anti-SLAPP public-interest exception. 		Anti-SLAPP, Municipal Law 2DCA/6 Aug. 27, 2025
Sandoval v. Pali Institute
Trial court erred in completely denying camping company's anti-SLAPP motion when some of plaintiff camp attendees' claims involved protected "public debate" speech: gender-identity discussions. 		Anti-SLAPP, Education 4DCA/3 Aug. 15, 2025
Ramirez v. McCormack
Because plaintiff's claims against defendant attorney involved litigation-related speech, trial court erred in denying defendant attorney's anti-SLAPP motion. 		Attorneys, Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Aug. 12, 2025
Michael K. v. Cho
Attorney's rebuttal contesting client's husband's chargeback challenge to her legal fees was protected by litigation privilege under the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Attorneys, Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/5 Jul. 30, 2025
Wong v. Dong
Interlocutory appeal was unavailable from order denying special motion to strike malicious prosecution claim subsequently filed by original target of a strategic lawsuit against public participation. 		Anti-SLAPP, Civil Procedure 1DCA/5 Jun. 24, 2025
Mora v. Menjivar
A supporting memorandum of points and authorities is a necessary constituent part of a "special motion" for purposes of the anti-SLAPP statutory deadline. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/1 Jun. 16, 2025
Sexton v. Apple Studios LLC
Trial court erroneously denied Apple Studio's anti-SLAPP motion against actor whose offer was withdrawn after he refused to comply with the studio's COVID vaccination requirement. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Apr. 1, 2025
Six4Three v. Facebook
Anti-SLAPP motion was appropriately granted against developer seeking to use defendant Facebook's photo data for an app allowing users to search for photos of people in swimsuits. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/4 Mar. 14, 2025
Callister v. James B. Church & Associates
Failure to advise a client to file a protective claim for a refund was not a protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP, Trust and Estates 4DCA/1 Jan. 23, 2025
Lindsay v. Patenaude & Felix
Request for monetary relief did not preclude the public interest exception to California's anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/1 Dec. 12, 2024
Modification: Littlefield v. Littlefield
Anti-SLAPP statute mandated granting of attorney's fees where motion was frivolous, as no reasonable attorney would conclude that plaintiff's petition sought to impose liability based on any protected activity. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/4 Dec. 6, 2024
Littlefield v. Littlefield
Anti-SLAPP statute mandated granting of attorney's fees where motion was frivolous, as no reasonable attorney would conclude that plaintiff's petition sought to impose liability based on any protected activity. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/4 Nov. 19, 2024
LVNV Funding v. Rodriguez
Because the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act allows consumers wrongly sued over a debt to pursue a claim, debt collector's anti-SLAPP motion against mistakenly-identified consumer was improperly granted. 		Consumer Law, Anti-SLAPP 5DCA Nov. 14, 2024
Osborne v. Pleasanton Automotive Co., LP
Employee letter to human resources complaining of workplace harassment was privileged and therefore could not be the basis of libel and slander claims. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/2 Nov. 1, 2024
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Powell
Public interest exemption to anti-SLAPP statute did not apply because no public interest was advanced by suing individual defendants for relief that only defendant Water District could provide. 		Anti-SLAPP, Municipal Law 4DCA/2 Oct. 15, 2024
Dignity Health v. Mounts
Granting anti-SLAPP special motion to strike was proper where surgeon failed to demonstrate probability of prevailing because hospital's adverse actions were shielded by the litigation and common interest privileges. 		Anti-SLAPP, Health Care 2DCA/6 Sep. 19, 2024
Modification: Taylor v. Tesla, Inc.
Despite pending parallel litigation, refusal to respond to employee record requests under the Labor Code was not protected conduct subject to the provisions of the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP, Employment Law 1DCA/4 Sep. 4, 2024
Taylor v. Tesla, Inc.
Despite pending parallel litigation, refusal to respond to employee record requests under the Labor Code was not protected conduct subject to the provisions of the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP, Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 12, 2024
WasteXperts, Inc. v. The City of Los Angeles
Declaratory relief claim did not arise from protected prelitigation activity where the dispute would exist even if defendant had not sent prelitigation correspondence. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/4 Jul. 15, 2024
Batis v. Dun & Bradstreet Holdings, Inc.
Anti-SLAPP motion was properly denied because database containing professional contact information did not meet requirements to overcome public interest exemption. 		Anti-SLAPP 9th Jul. 9, 2024
Luo v. Volokh
Plaintiff's restraining order petition was properly stricken as a strategic lawsuit against public participation targeting defendant's writings about her history of pseudonymous litigation. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/1 Jun. 27, 2024
Bui v. Ky
Plaintiff, wife of a local politician, was not a limited-purpose public figure who needed to show defendants acted with malice in their anti-SLAPP motion. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 May 10, 2024
Bassi v. Bassi
Domestic violence restraining order was not struck even though some of anti-SLAPP movant's activity was protected because restraining order petition had requisite minimal merit. 		Anti-SLAPP, Family Law 6DCA May 10, 2024
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.