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

1,152 chars

Additionally, as I noted recently, “the SLAPP statute has been litigated heavily since its enactment in 1992 (Stats. 1992, ch. 726, § 2, p. 3523), and the Legislature has not hesitated to amend the statute when it believed courts were interpreting it incorrectly. (See, e.g., Stats. 2005, ch. 535, § 3, p. 4123 [‘It is the intent of the Legislature, in amending subdivision (f) of Section 425.16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to overrule the decisions in Decker v. U.D. Registry, Inc. (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 1382,1387-1390 [129 Cal.Rptr.2d 892], and Fair *1220Political Practices Commission v. American Civil Rights Coalition, Inc. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1171, 1174-1178 [18 Cal.Rptr.3d 157].’].) Furthermore, because the Legislature has amended section 425.16, twice since Mann was decided (see Stats. 2005, ch. 535, § 1, p. 4120; Stats. 2009, ch. 65, § 1), the doctrine of legislative acquiescence has application. (See Olmstead. v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (2004) 32 Cal.4th 804, 816 [11 Cal.Rptr.3d 298, 86 P.3d 354].)” (Haight Ashbury Free Clinics, Inc. v. Happening House Ventures (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1554-1555 [110 Cal.Rptr.3d 129].)

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text