Gumarang

Gumarang v. Braemer on Raymond CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 5, 2025B323083California6,581 words

Opinion

Opinion

Viramontes, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff and cross-defendant Allan Gumarang appeals from the trial court’s order granting in part and denying in part his special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (anti-SLAPP statute),1 directed at the cross- complaint filed by defendants and cross-complainants Braemer on Raymond, LLC; Braemer-Caledonia Company; M&A Real Estate Services, Inc.; and Deanne Cantu.2 Gumarang also appeals from the court’s order denying his request for attorney fees under the anti-SLAPP statute. As we explain, the court properly denied in part Gumarang’s special motion to strike. We also conclude the court did not abuse its discretion when it

All further undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure. Braemer-Caledonia Company, M&A Real Estate Services, Inc., and Cantu filed a respondent’s brief addressing both the court’s order denying in part Gumarang’s anti-SLAPP motion and its order denying Gumarang’s attorney fees motion. Braemer on Raymond, LLC, which dismissed its cross-claims against Gumarang before the court ruled on his anti-SLAPP motion, filed a respondent’s brief addressing only the court’s order denying…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.