Sahar

Sahar v. Miller CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 3, 2025A167830California2,675 words

Opinion

Opinion

Petrou, J.

BACKGROUND

On March 23, 2022, plaintiffs placed into the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse drop box a complaint against Miller and his client, Said Shefayee (March complaint). That complaint arose from a prior case (Shefayee Jr. v. Sahar et al., Super. Ct. Contra Costa County, 2018, No. C18-01416) in which Miller represented Shefayee in claims alleging unpaid wages, unpaid overtime, and other Labor Code violations. The March complaint alleged causes of action for (1) malicious prosecution, (2) abuse of process, (3) negligent infliction of emotional distress, (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress and (5) declaratory relief. On April 18, 2022, plaintiffs filed a duplicative complaint (April complaint), explaining they were uncertain whether the March complaint had been accepted by the court. After serving the April complaint on Miller and Shefayee, plaintiffs received file-stamped copies of the March complaint but did not serve it at that time. On June 7, 2022, Miller responded to the April complaint by filing an anti-SLAPP motion. Miller argued that the filing of a lawsuit constituted an act in furtherance of the constitutional right to petition, a protected activity under…

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.