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

659 chars 
The majority “would think that Taus would be the death knell for the rule ventured ... in Mann” because “[i]n evaluating the probability of prevailing on assertions of liability based on protected activity, the court in Taus looked at whether those assertions—not any others in the purported cause of action or count—had any merit.” (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 1210.) In my view, it is apparent why the Supreme Court looked only at the four grounds of liability that had been asserted and not any others. That was the only issue before the court. The narrow focus of Taus and the court’s narrow ruling was simply a product of the procedural posture of the case. '