DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)

Citation
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Parent Document
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2011-06-27
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5810370/wallace-v-mccubbin/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text

474 chars 
Wallace and Owen opposed the motion to strike. They claimed that the gravamen of the action was one for disability discrimination and did not attack any act of defendants in filing or prosecuting the unlawful detainer action itself. As to the merits, Wallace and Owen argued that they had a probability of proving McCubbin and Merck were the Wus’ agents in the prosecution of the unlawful detainer action and the causes of action were not barred by the litigation privilege.