California Court of Appeal

In plaintiff's suit against his former employer claiming, inter alia, causes of action for defamation, invasion of privacy/false light, negligent and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, arising from representations made by the defendant in a widely disseminated press release concerning the company's internal investigation into its handling of certain research and development test data and results, the trial court's grant in part defendants' special motion to strike plaintiff's first amended complaint as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (commonly known as the anti-SLAPP statute), is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not meet his burden to show his causes of action fall within the commercial speech exemption, and thus they are subject to the anti-SLAPP law; and 2) the absolute and qualified privileges of Civil Code section 47 do not apply to defendants' press release, and plaintiff has otherwise demonstrated a probability of prevailing on his causes of action for defamation, invasion of privacy, unfair business practices and breach of contract.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/13/2012
• Published 09/13/2012

Judges

• O'Rourke

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel