California Court of Appeal

In legal malpractice action, denial of special motion to strike brought under the anti-SLAPP statute is affirmed as: 1) legal malpractice is not an activity protected under the anti-SLAPP statute; 2) that the malpractice allegedly occurred in the course of petitioning activity does not mean the claim arose from the activity itself; 3) defendant failed to meet its initial burden; and 4) the litigation privilege does not bar legal malpractice claims based on a litigator's failure to provide competent representation in a prior lawsuit.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/21/2006
• Published 12/21/2006

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Law Offices of Timothy J. Donahue and Timothy J. Donahue, Irvine, for Defendant and Appellant., Shulman Hodges & Bastian, Ronald S. Hodges, Franklin J. Contreras, Jr., and Evan W. Granowitz, Foothill Ranch, for Plaintiffs and Respondents.