For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

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
Doe v. Ledor
Defendant's emails to Darthmouth regarding a fellow high school senior's student body election fraud were not protected anti-SLAPP speech because they never contributed to the public conversation on the election. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/4 Dec. 4, 2023
Modification: BioCorRx, Inc. v. VDM Biochemicals, Inc.
Trial court erred in granting anti-SLAPP motion because the challenged statements--allegedly confidential information regarding a soured business agreement--fell under the statute's commercial speech exemption. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 Nov. 21, 2023
Mary's Kitchen v. City of Orange
Anti-SLAPP protection did not apply to city council's cancellation of license agreement where the plaintiff's claims were based on the city council's ordinary business of governance, not its protected speech. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 Oct. 26, 2023
BioCorRx, Inc. v. VDM Biochemicals, Inc.
Trial court erred in granting anti-SLAPP motion because the challenged statements--allegedly confidential information regarding a soured business agreement--fell under the statute's commercial speech exemption. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 Oct. 24, 2023
Ross v. Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Law firm engaged under public university executive order to investigate workplace misconduct was prevailing party for anti-SLAPP fee-shifting because its conduct was related to an official proceeding authorized by law. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Oct. 23, 2023
Martinez v. ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc.
The public interest anti-SLAPP exemption applied to plaintiff because her individual relief would not exceed or differ from the relief sought on behalf of the general public. 		Anti-SLAPP 9th Sep. 22, 2023
Li v. Jenkins
Anti-SLAPP motion was properly denied since there was no "functional relationship" between excluding an executive producer of a popular docuseries and the public interest in the project and its themes. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Sep. 15, 2023
Iloh v. Regents of the University of California
Professor's petition to prevent disclosure of her communications with academic journals arose from protected activity under the Anti-SLAPP statute because the disclosure request was a newsgathering effort. 		Anti-SLAPP California Courts of Appeal Aug. 25, 2023
Park v. Nazari
The court affirmed the dismissal of defendants' anti-SLAPP motion to strike the entire complaint because defendants did not identify which specific claims for relief arose from protected activity. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/5 Jul. 27, 2023
Modification: Divine Food and Catering v. Western Diocese of the Armenian
Plaintiff's malicious prosecution action had minimal merit since court's statements regarding defendants' purported oral lease were not a judgment or verdict sufficient to trigger the interim adverse judgment rule. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/1 Jul. 19, 2023
Brown v. City of Inglewood
Inglewood treasurer's retaliation claims against the City and City Counsel arose out of protected voting activity and did not have minimal merit because she was not an employee. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/1 Jul. 3, 2023
Divine Food and Catering v. Western Diocese of the Armenian
Plaintiff's malicious prosecution action had minimal merit since court's statements regarding defendants' purported oral lease were not a judgment or verdict sufficient to trigger the interim adverse judgment rule. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/1 Jun. 30, 2023
Hastings College Conservation Committee v. Faigman
Though legislation changing Hastings Law School's name could adversely affect protected speech, anti-SLAPP motion was properly denied because the legislation, not the protected speech, was the basis of the lawsuit. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/1 Jun. 7, 2023
Modification: Collins v. Waters
Congresswoman's anti-SLAPP motion was granted in error because plaintiff had made a preliminary evidentiary showing that he could prevail in his underlying defamation suit. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Jun. 6, 2023
Nirschl v. Schiller
Hirer's statements about a nanny to her agency about her termination were not protected statements made in anticipation of litigation because the threat of litigation was merely theoretical. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/4 May 12, 2023
Collins v. Waters
Congresswoman's anti-SLAPP motion was granted in error because plaintiff had made a preliminary evidentiary showing that he could prevail in his underlying defamation suit. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 May 11, 2023
Gunn v. Drage
Federal courts ruling on an anti-SLAPP motion are entitled to rely on extrinsic evidence for both the first and second steps of the analysis. 		Anti-SLAPP 9th Apr. 24, 2023
Durkin v. City and County of San Francisco
Property owner's anti-SLAPP motion was reversed because his protected petitioning activity did not constitute the factual allegations in appellants' petition for writ of mandate against San Francisco housing decisionmakers. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/3 Apr. 18, 2023
Billauer v. Escobar-Eck
Defendant established a probability of success on libel claim because plaintiff's social media posts asserted that defendant was an unscrupulous liar who would do anything to build a development project. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/1 Mar. 2, 2023
Geragos v. Abelyan
The *Flatley* extortion exemption to protected representation communications does not apply where there is a material dispute about the allegedly extortionate communications. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Mar. 2, 2023
Water for Citizens of Weed California v. Churchwell White LLP
Anti-SLAPP motion was affirmed because plaintiffs did not establish law firm lacked probable cause to bring quiet title action based on a formal request to determine a corporation's water rights. 		Anti-SLAPP 3DCA Feb. 13, 2023
Starr v. Ashbrook
Allegations underlying claim of misused trust assets were not protected activities under anti-SLAPP statute because misusing trust assets is not in furtherance of a right of petition or free speech. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 Jan. 30, 2023
Aguilar v. Mandarich Law Grp.
As the federal equivalent of the state's Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires showing that the violation was material, the state statute also requires the same objective standard. 		Anti-SLAPP 6DCA Jan. 18, 2023
White v. Davis
Daughter's application for an elder abuse restraining order against her father's second wife and step-daughter survived an anti-SLAPP challenge because defendants' attempts to control the father were not protected activities. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/2 Jan. 9, 2023
Cordoba Corp. v. City of Industry
Trial court properly granted anti-SLAPP motion where the gravamen of dispute arose from a lawsuit, a protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Jan. 5, 2023
Jenkins v. Brandt-Hawley
Malicious prosecution claim was not subject to anti-SLAPP motion to strike where plaintiff demonstrated prior action lacked probable cause and was prosecuted with indifference, suggesting malice. 		Anti-SLAPP 1DCA/2 Dec. 29, 2022
City of Rocklin v. Legacy Family Adventures
Anti-SLAPP motion to strike was properly denied because the motion, asserting that a theme park was an artistic work intended to be excepted from the commercial speech exemption, was devoid of merit. 		Anti-SLAPP 3DCA Dec. 22, 2022
Bishop v. The Bishop's School
Because termination letter was for private purposes only, not contributing to public discourse, it was not protected free speech activity under anti-SLAPP provisions. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/1 Dec. 22, 2022
Flickinger v. Finwall
Counsel's prelitigation letter did not qualify as extortion that was unprotectable under Civil Code Section 425.16 because it did not fall outside the bounds of professional norms. 		Anti-SLAPP 2DCA/8 Dec. 1, 2022
Timothy W. v. Julie W.
Litigation privilege barred breach of oral contract claims in anti-SLAPP suit between divorcing couple. 		Anti-SLAPP 4DCA/3 Nov. 23, 2022
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.