It Did Not Matter, Because SLAPP Denial Was Affirmed On Appeal.
Freeman v. LMA & SAI 1433 Wilshire LLC, Case No. B325212 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Nov. 9, 2023) (unpublished) goes to show you that you may hurdle procedural appealability obstacles, only to have the merits affirmed anyway.
In this one, the procedural history was somewhat convoluted. Cross-defendant filed a SLAPP motion against the cross-complaint, with the lower court denying the motion and further finding that he was not the prevailing party to obtain SLAPP mandatory attorney’s fees. On the same day as this order, cross-complainant dismissed its cross-complaint without prejudice. Cross-defendant appealed the SLAPP merits adverse ruling as well as the fee order denial.
The 2/7 DCA ultimately affirmed the merits of the SLAPP denial. But, first, the panel had to decide if the appeal was moot based on the cross-complaint dismissal. It was not, according to the Court of Appeal, under the unusual circumstances of the matter. What was determinative in this one was that the lower court denied the fee request such that a future fees motion would have been futile. Given that the dismissal did not deprive the lower court of jurisdiction to determine if he was the prevailing party, the lower court’s actual denial of the merits and fee request properly presented a proper appeal for both issues. The sui generis facts, we believe, led to this result, which the DCA expressly acknowledged.
Comments