Skip to main content
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

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text

1,141 chars
The Legislature was advised that SLAPP’s are legally unsuccessful lawsuits that exact a high toll from targeted defendants and deter others from exercising their petitioning rights. (Sen. Com. on Judiciary, Rep. on Sen. Bill No. 1264 (1991-1992 Reg. Sess.) Feb. 25, 1992, p. 3.) Cases thereafter characterized SLAPP’s as lawsuits brought not to recover damages or vindicate a legal right, but merely to run up the defendant’s litigation costs. (E.g., Wilcox v. *1202Superior Court (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 809, 815-817 [33 Cal.Rptr.2d 446].) By this definition, a lawsuit would not be a true SLAPP if it included a claim that had some merit. The Legislature, however, must have been concerned with more than precluding true SLAPP’s. Otherwise, a meritless cause of action based solely on protected activity would not be struck from a complaint if there were any merit to some other cause of action in the complaint. That is neither what the statute says nor the law. (Shekhter v. Financial Indemnity Co. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 141, 150 [106 Cal.Rptr.2d 843]; Coretronic Corp. v. O’Connor (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 1381, 1388 [121 Cal.Rptr.3d 254].)