On November 9, a California judge dismissed the $3.8 million defamation lawsuit against Phoebe Bridgers based on California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Representatives for Bridgers stated that the lawsuit, filed by studio owner Chris Nelson, was filed for the sole purpose of causing harm to the star’s reputation and career. Read more about the suit here.
Read MoreDavid Nunes loses another lawsuit.
Read MorePPP Policy Director, Evan Mascagni, recently wrote a blog post for the California Anti-SLAPP Project on Devin Nunes.
Read More'Turnbull' and 'Newport Harbor' confirm that the days of basing an anti-SLAPP motion on a "gravamen" test or on conclusory assertions of protected activity are behind us.
A lawyer said he will move to dismiss the extortion suit filed by an NFL player under California’s anti-SLAPP statute and litigation privilege.
Read MoreThe California Supreme Court passed on actress Olivia de Havilland’s publicity rights challenge to an FX television show.
Read MoreA woman said she was let go from ATTN: after protesting a racial slur from one of the news site's investors. A judge ruled that she is likely to prevail in her lawsuit.
Read MoreThe California Supreme Court issued a ruling in Hassell v. Bird, a case with serious ramifications for consumer speech.
Read MoreAn appeals court in California tossed a lawsuit filed against the San Francisco Chronicle by a now-disbarred lawyer who claimed the newspaper defamed him. The appeals court affirmed dismissal based on California’s anti-SLAPP law.
Read MoreAttorneys for 20th Century Fox asked a Los Angeles Superior Court judge to throw out a countersuit that Netflix filed against Fox. Fox said the countersuit should be thrown out because it concerned protected speech under the California anti-SLAPP statute, but the judge rejected the motion. Then a three-judge panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s ruling, deciding that the Netflix countersuit was not barred by the anti-SLAPP statute.
Read MoreA California Appeals Court affirmed a trial court’s denial of an anti-SLAPP motion that defendants filed in a lawsuit in which plaintiffs claimed that public school officials took retaliatory actions against a former board member by disseminating confidential medical information and making claims of improper activity against her.
Addressing a potential conflict between California’s anti-SLAPP law and the federal procedural rules, the Ninth Circuit last month specified what analysis courts should use when faced with a motion to dismiss a “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.”
Read MoreAttorneys representing investors in a basketball league filed an anti-SLAPP motion in a defamation case that the league, O’shea Jackson (aka Ice Cube) and Jeff Kwatinetz brought against the investors.
Read MoreA federal judge in Hawaii refused to dismiss a producer’s libel lawsuit against a woman who accused him of rape. However, the judge agreed that the case should be governed by the California anti-SLAPP statute, though the producer’s attorneys had argued that the case should be governed by Hawaii’s anti-SLAPP law.
Read MorePPP Board member Jeremy Rosen recently co-wrote an article with Felix Shafir for Law360 on the complexities of California's anti-SLAPP statute. Click through for the article.
Read More
