California Court of Appeal

When reversal of a trial court judgment in the Court of Appeal gives rise to a possible cause of action for malicious prosecution, the statute of limitations first begins to run on the date the Court of Appeal issues its remittitur. Where an action is reversed on appeal and the plaintiff's attorney is then sued for malicious prosecution, but the trial court sustains a demurrer to the malicious prosecution complaint, the attorney is entitled to attorney's fees under the anti-SLAPP statute.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/29/2002
• Published 10/29/2002

Judges

• GILBERT, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  Raymond D. Kitlas for Plaintiff and Appellant K. Martin White.


• For Appellees:
  
• Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP., Kenneth C. Feldman, Craig L. Dunkin and Jeffry A. Miller for Defendants and Appellants Lawrence R. Lieberman and Belin, Rawlings & Badal., Stephanie J. Shulman for Defendant and Respondent Old Republic Title Company., Regan C. Nagel for Defendant and Respondent Chicago Title Insurance Company., Lawrence R. Lieberman for Defendants and Respondents Levinson & Lieberman;  Levinson, Lieberman & Snyder;  and Levinson, Lieberman & Maas.