OneTaste

DISCUSSION

I. Legal Principles and Standard of Review

A. Attorney fees under section 425.16 Defendants who prevail on anti-SLAPP motions are entitled to attorney fees and costs. (§ 425.16, subd. (c).) “The fee- shifting provision was apparently intended to discourage . . . strategic lawsuits against public participation by imposing the litigation costs on the party seeking to ‘chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the

3 redress of grievances.’ (Id., subd. (a).)” (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1131 (Ketchum).) “In general, the party prevailing on a special motion to strike may seek an attorney fees award through three different avenues: simultaneously with litigating the special motion to strike, by a subsequent noticed motion, or as part of a cost memorandum . . . .” (Melbostad v. Fisher (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 987, 992 (Melbostad).) “Although a trial court’s ruling on the propriety of an attorney fees award is generally reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard, the determination of whether the trial court had the statutory authority to make such an award is a question of law that we review de novo.”…