California Court of Appeal

Trial court order granting plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate directing the city clerk to refrain from certifying a referendum petition is reversed where the referendum petition circulated by real party in interest Ayala complied with the literal requirements of Election Code sec. 9238, and the statute does not require a referendum petition to include documents that were neither attached to the challenged ordinance nor incorporated by reference. Trial court order denying a special motion to strike is affirmed where the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the anti-SLAPP motion against plaintiffs as the actions challenging that petition were legally sufficient, and possessed at least the minimal merit necessary to withstand an anti-SLAPP motion, and the case is remanded for a determination of whether real party in interest Ayala is a prevailing party for the purposes of attorney's fees.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/16/2009
• Published 07/16/2009

Judges

• NEEDHAM, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, Benjamin G. Shatz, Christopher D. LeGras, Camas J. Steinmetz, Palo Alto, for Real Party in Interest and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Cox, Castle & Nicholson, Andrew B. Sabey, R. Clark Morrison, Bradley B. Brownlow, San Francisco, for Plaintiffs and Respondents., No appearance for Defendant and Respondent.