Sanders

Plaintiff Cheryl Sanders sued defendants Constance Walsh and Wiggin Out Salons, Inc. (Wiggin Out), over allegedly defamatory statements posted online. After a bench trial, the court entered judgment for plaintiff, awarding compensatory and punitive damages. Defendants raise five contentions on appeal: (1) The defamatory statements were nonactionable opinion; (2) the court erred in finding they were collaterally estopped from relitigating issues previously decided in a small claims action; (3) the court erred in excluding evidence of plaintiff’s prior felony conviction, which was previously dismissed pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4; (4) there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of malice related to punitive damages; and, finally, (5) they challenge certain discovery orders in favor of a third party.

We affirm. We reject all of the alleged errors with the exception of the finding that defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating issues decided in a small claims action. But we find that error was harmless.

FACTS

This case arises from an aborted sale of a wig. In June 2009, plaintiff’s mother purchased a wig from defendant Wiggin Out due to the…