California Court of Appeal

In a complaint alleging defendant made false and libelous remarks about plaintiff's research, the trial court's denial of defendant's special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute is affirmed where: 1) defendant's statements did not arise from protected activity; and 2) even if the conduct arose from protected activity, the claims have sufficient merit to survive a motion to strike.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/09/2015
• Published 10/09/2015

Judges

• RUVOLO

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel