Dixon

Dixon v. Superior Court

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1223·30 Cal. App. 4th 733·36 Cal. Rptr. 2d 687·94 Daily Journal DAR 16878·23 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1663
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1994G015646California4,569 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallin, J.

In this petition for writ of mandate we are asked to interpret recently enacted legislation (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16) designed to curtail a growing number of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits.

Factual and Procedural Background

At the heart of this controversy is a 22-acre portion of the California State University at Long Beach (CSULB) campus long believed by many Native American Indians to be part of an ancient Indian village known as Puvunga. In 1974, following nomination by petitioner Keith Dixon, an archaeologist and professor emeritus of anthropology at CSULB, the Puvunga site was accepted for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

Sometime in late 1979 or early 1980, CSULB contracted with Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc. (SRS) to perform archaeological tests on a portion of the Puvunga site on which it wanted to build a Japanese garden and museum. The 1980 report prepared by SRS concluded the proposed project would cause no “adverse effects to archaeological and/or historic resources.” In early 1981, the director of CSULB’s physical planning and development department forwarded a copy of SRS’s archaeological report…

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.