Sexton

Sexton v. Apple Studios LLC

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 2025B333481California8,465 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiley, J.

Filed 3/28/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

BRENT SEXTON, B333481

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 23STCV11417 v.

APPLE STUDIOS LLC,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael P. Linfield, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp , Emma Luevano, Stephen A. Rossi and Rebecca Benyamin for Defendant and Appellant. JW Howard/Attorneys, John W. Howard and Scott J. Street for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________ During the COVID-19 pandemic, Apple Studios LLC offered Brent Sexton a film role on the condition he get vaccinated. Sexton refused vaccination and sued Apple when it withdrew its offer and cast a different actor. The trial court erroneously denied Apple’s anti-SLAPP motion. Apple’s casting was conduct in furtherance of free speech in connection with two public issues: a prominent entertainment company (1) voted with its feet in the vaccination controversy and (2) decided how to portray an enigmatic figure in American history. On the merits, Apple’s…

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.