A common cause of failure on an anti-SLAPP motion is a misunderstanding of the evidentiary burdens each side must satisfy. I suppose its understandable given skeletal analysis found in most of the typical practice guides. And with over 400 published decisions in this area, I suppose it's inevitable that busy practitioners--who are not experts--will overlook some of the … [Read more...] about Anti-SLAPP Defendant’s Burden Of Proof: Prong Two
Appeals
Lutfi v. Spears: Court of Appeal Rules In His Favor
Lutfi scores another important victory. The Second District Court of Appeals, in Los Angeles, affirmed the trial judge's decision denying Spears's (not Britney--her mother) anti-SLAPP motion. If you recall, Spears wrote a book and included some statements about Lufti, which he didn't like very much, to put it mildly. So he sued her claiming libel, defamation, and intentional … [Read more...] about Lutfi v. Spears: Court of Appeal Rules In His Favor
Can an anti-SLAPP Motion Be Filed In Federal Court?
This is a question that comes up quite frequently and appears to be a source of some confusion. The law is that motions to strike a state law claim are proper in California Federal courts, e.g., libel, slander, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. This is so because there is no conflict between the Federal rules and Code of Civil Procedure 425.16(b). … [Read more...] about Can an anti-SLAPP Motion Be Filed In Federal Court?
What Is The Standard of Review On An anti-SLAPP Appeal?
I outlined in a previous post how risky it is for a losing plaintiff on an anti-SLAPP motion to appeal a trial court's ruling. The primary reason being that a prevailing defendant may be awarded his attorney's fees for opposing the SLAPP at the trial and appellate levels. But in this post I want to lay off the doom and gloom (after all, it's another sunny day in Los Angeles) … [Read more...] about What Is The Standard of Review On An anti-SLAPP Appeal?