California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Nunez v. Pennisi, H039910

In a case alleging malicious prosecution, the trial court's denial of appellant's anti-SLAPP motion and the award of attorney fees to respondent is: 1) reversed where respondents have not shown his action has the minimal merit necessary to avoid being stricken as a SLAPP, nor have they shown a probability of prevailing on the merits against either appellant; 2) affirmed where respondent has shown that his malicious prosecution action against respondent has minimal merit, where unless a trial court otherwise specifies, a grant of nonsuit in the underlying case is a "legal termination favorable to the plaintiff" for the purposes of a subsequent malicious prosecution action; and 3) reversed with respect to the order awarding attorney fees where the order failed to comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure sections 425.16(c) and 128.5(c).

Appellate Information

  • Decided 10/27/2015
  • Published 10/27/2015




  • California Court of Appeal


Copied to clipboard