Hoffman v. Davenport-Metcalf, 851 A.2d 1083 (2004)

Citation: Hoffman v. Davenport-Metcalf, 851 A.2d 1083 (2004)
Parent Document: Hoffman v. Davenport-Metcalf, 851 A.2d 1083 (2004)
Jurisdiction: Rhode Island (state)
Effective Date: 2004-06-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2095214/hoffman-v-davenport-metcalf/ ↗

Full Text

1,055 chars

For the reasons stated in the Court’s opinion, the claims at issue in this case are deficient in other respects, making it unnecessary for us to decide that the anti-SLAPP statute does not bar these claims because, as the majority concludes, the defendants’ challenged actions did not raise genuine issues of public concern. When the plaintiffs failed to show a sufficient factual and legal predicate for their complaint against their landlord and property manager, the Superior Court properly dismissed the complaint on summary judgment. In this context, the majority’s narrow construction of the anti-SLAPP statute’s scope is obiter dictum. Thus, because we have no need to decide whether the anti-SLAPP statute bars these claims, I would refrain from passing on that potentially delicate and more difficult question. --- 010combined --- 851 A.2d 1083 (2004)
Lester HOFFMAN et al. v. Judy DAVENPORT-METCALF et al. No. 2003-431-Appeal.
Supreme Court of Rhode Island. June 21, 2004.
*1085 Anne L. Mishley, for Plaintiff. Alexander G. Walsh, for Defendant.

Other Sections in This Document (104)

Full Text