DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 425

Citation
Section 425
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

624 chars 
Finally, Wallace and Owen’s gestalt theory would permit crafty plaintiffs to skirt the intended protections of the anti-SLAPP statute, by characterizing their attack on protected activity in broad terms such as “discrimination.” (See Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc. v. Paladino (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 294, 308 [106 Cal.Rptr.2d 906] [“a plaintiff cannot frustrate the purposes of the SLAPP statute through a pleading tactic of combining allegations of protected and nonprotected activity under the label of one ‘cause of action’ ”].) Wallace and Owen’s gestalt approach is simply untenable. c. Respondents’ cases are inapposite