Town of Madawaska v. Richard Cayer, 2014 ME 121 (2014)

Citation: Town of Madawaska v. Richard Cayer, 2014 ME 121 (2014)
Parent Document: Town of Madawaska v. Richard Cayer, 2014 ME 121 (2014)
Jurisdiction: Maine (state)
Effective Date: 2014-11-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2747905/town-of-madawaska-v-richard-cayer/ ↗

Full Text

1,230 chars

7
     The California and Texas anti-SLAPP statutes expressly exempt government enforcement actions
brought in the name of the state. See Cal. Civ. Code § 425.16(d) (West 2011); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.
Code Ann. § 27.010(a) (West 2013). Exactly which civil actions by cities and towns are exempt appears
to be a developing question of law, but some California state appellate courts have extended this
exemption to include at least “all civil actions brought by state and local agencies to enforce laws aimed
at consumer and/or public protection.” City of Long Beach v. California Citizens for Neighborhood
Empowerment, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 473, 478 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003). But see City of Los Angeles v. Animal Def.
League, 37 Cal.Rptr.3d 632, 642 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (refusing to extend exemption for City’s workplace
violence petition, stating that “only actions brought by a governmental agency to enforce laws aimed
generally at public protection qualify for this exemption to anti-SLAPP scrutiny”).
  8
     The enacting bill’s brief statement of fact does indicate, however, that the Legislature intended for a
special motion to dismiss to apply to those claims or counterclaims filed for retributory or otherwise
frivolous reasons:

Other Sections in This Document (160)

Full Text