California Court of Appeal

In a suit by a bank against a former employee for posting allegedly defamatory messages on craigslist, the trial court's denial of an anti-SLAPP motion to strike is reversed, where: 1) the anti-SLAPP statute applied to the bank's defamation action, because the defendant's postings were protected speech, since even if the defendant's speech violated Financial Code section 1327, it could not be deemed illegal as a matter of law because that statute is an impermissible content-based restriction on speech protected by constitutional free speech guarantees; and 2) the bank failed to satisfy its burden of showing a probability of success on the merits, since the defendant met his burden of showing that the action arose from an act in furtherance of his constitutional right of free speech in connection with an issue of public interest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/29/2012
• Published 05/29/2012

Judges

• Ruvolo

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Sweeney, Mason, Wilson & Bosomworth, Law Offices of Steven B. Piser