Kim
Kim v. Woocher CA2/4
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
Defendants who prevail on special motions to strike under our anti- SLAPP statute are entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (c).)1 However, defendants are not entitled to receive all the fees they request or even all the fees that they actually incurred. Rather, prevailing defendants may only recover those fees that the trial court determines were reasonably incurred in bringing an anti-SLAPP challenge. Here, an attorney who successfully defended tenants in unlawful detainer actions was later sued by the landlord. The landlord’s complaint alleged that the defendant attorney engaged in misconduct during the unlawful detainer actions. The attorney responded by filing an anti-SLAPP motion to strike one of the landlord’s causes of action, arguing the claim arose from protected activity and was barred by the litigation privilege. In response, the landlord voluntarily dismissed the entire action. The defendant attorney then moved for an award of attorneys’ fees, arguing he would have prevailed on the merits of his anti-SLAPP motion. The trial court granted the motion for attorneys’ fees but reduced the award from the approximately…