Current Edition- California Business Practice

The Peacemaker Quarterly- April 2014

Monday, October 5, 2009

California anti-Slapp Legislation

In enacting this anti-SLAPP provision, the California Legislature declared that there has been a disturbing increase in lawsuits brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the redress of grievances. The Legislature finds and declares that it is in the public interest to encourage continued participation in matters of public significance, and that this participation should not be chilled through abuse of the judicial process. To this end, this section shall be construed broadly.

Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c), a court is obligated to award attorneys' fees and costs to a defendant who successfully moves to strike under that section. ("In any action subject to subdivision (b), a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney's fees and costs."). Subdivision (b)(1) of section 425.16 provides:

A cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim.

Subdivision (e) of section 425.16 elaborates upon subdivision (b). It provides:
As used in this section, "act in furtherance of a person's right of petition or free speech under the united States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue" includes: (1) any written or oral statement or writing made before a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; (2) any written or oral statement or writing made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; (3) any written or oral statement or writing made in a place open to the public or a public forum in connection with an issue of public interest; (4) or any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.

3 comments:

  1. This is a positive change in terms of preventing the intimidation of opposing parties expressing free speech and exercising participation as well as discouraging the abuse of the judicial system. Where would be the downside? What would be the drawbacks of this legislation? If any?

    ReplyDelete
  2. When I read this yesterday I didnt understand what "SLAPP" was. I figured out that it is an acronym for strategic lawsuit against public participation. I leaned a lot more on the background at Wikipedia ( the nightmare sight of all professors).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great!!- you located an acronym that I was not familiar with! I have read about different interpretations of "SLAPP".

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.