Appeal Sanctions, SLAPP: In Pro Per Defendants’ SLAPP Motion Was Frivolous, Entitling Plaintiff To $9,900 In Attorney’s Fees

Frivolous Appeal Sanctions Denied, But Plaintiff Was Entitled To Appellate Fees For Prevailing On The SLAPP Denial.

            Sometimes, there is more than one way to “skin a cat” as the proverbial saying goes.  That is what happened in Martin v. Smith, Case No. A157129 (1^st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 26, 2020) (unpublished).

            There, two in pro per defendants filed a SLAPP motion which was deemed frivolous by the lower court, resulting in an award of $9,900 in attorney’s fees to plaintiff.  Defendants, still in pro per, then appealed.  The appellate court agreed that the SLAPP motion was frivolous and the fee award justified.  Plaintiff moved for frivolous appeal sanctions, although she failed to file a motion for sanctions and supporting declaration as required under California Rules of Court, rule 8.276.  However, because she did prevail on appeal, plaintiff was entitled to further SLAPP fees, something remanded to the lower court to determine.  (The only difference is that SLAPP fees cannot be imposed against a party’s attorney, although frivolous sanctions can.)