Watts v. Curry, Case No. B213862 (2d Dist., Div. 6 May 17, 2010) (unpublished)
The first sentence of this decision told us it was written in the distinctive writing style of Presiding Justice Gilbert: “A series of seemingly petty, yet niggling, acts fueled by anger and frustration precipitated this unfortunate lawsuit.”
A homeowner was arrested for burglary, after taking certain HOA minutes from the HOA office to review. Charges were later dismissed with prejudice. Homeowner sued the HOA and certain others for malicious prosecution, false arrest, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and civil rights violations. Homeowner’s suit was SLAPPed, with the lower court apparently awarding substantial attorney’s fees against homeowner (although the amount is not mentioned in the decision).
On appeal, fee award affirmed. “[Homeowner’s] argument that the fee award is excessive does not clear the high hurdle imposed by the abuse of discretion standard.” (Slip Opn., p. 4.)
Warner v. City of Citrus Heights Police Dept., Case No. C060482 (3d Dist. May 18,
2010) (unpublished)
In this one, defendants appealed an outright denial of their SLAPP motion. The Third District, on appeal, decided the lower court should have SLAPPed three counts of the complaint but agreed that three claims were properly not SLAPPed.
So, in light of this partial reversal, were defendants entitled to mandatory fee shifting under the SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(c))? Yes, said the Court of Appeal. The appellate court observed that defendants who prevail in part on an anti-SLAPP motion are entitled to a partial award of attorney’s fees under section 425.16. (ComputerXpress, Inc. v. Jackson, 93 Cal.App.4th 993, 1016-1020 (2001).) “We think the same rule applies to partial victory on appeal.” (Slip Opn., p. 50.) The cause was remanded so that the trial court could determine those partial fees awardable to defendants for their successful SLAPP work both at the trial and appellate court levels.
Comments