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/ ↗

Full Text

1,155 chars

Adopting any of these three alternatives as the plain meaning of section 425.16, subdivision (b)(1) would compel a plaintiff to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his attempt to base liability on protected activity. The fact that there are three alternatives may suggest subdivision (b)(1) is ambiguous, but the ambiguity is of no moment since all three alternatives point to the same conclusion—any ambiguity as to whether “cause of action” and “claim” mean the same thing or different things is overcome by the statute’s obvious purpose of protecting meritless attacks on the activity set forth in subdivision (e) of section 425.16. (See Taus, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 742-743 [purpose of anti-SLAPP statute is to minimize the chilling of protected activity].) On this basis, the face of the statute discloses only one *1200reasonable answer to the question of what a plaintiff must do to show a probability of prevailing, and there is no need to resort to legislative history or other means of statutory construction; a plaintiff must show a probability of prevailing on the assertion of liability based on protected activity, and nothing else.

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text