Hudis

Hudis v. Crawford

Good Law
125 Cal. App. 4th 1586·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 103·24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 50·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 820
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2005H026621California2,208 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mihara, J.

Defendant, Attorney Debra Vaniman Crawford filed an action against plaintiffs Emily Hudis and Hugo Gerstl, alleging that they were liable to her clients for elder abuse of her clients’ deceased aunt Claire Eagleton. The elder abuse action was dismissed because Eagleton’s nieces and nephew lacked standing, as they were not Eagleton’s successors in interest. Hudis and Gerstl then filed the instant action for malicious prosecution against Crawford and the nieces and the nephew. Crawford demurred to the complaint on the ground that dismissal of the elder abuse action was not a favorable termination on the merits for malicious prosecution purposes. The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend and dismissed the action as to Crawford. Hudis and Gerstl appeal. They claim that the “lack of standing” dismissal of the elder abuse action was a favorable termination on the merits for malicious prosecution purposes. We find that the dismissal of the elder abuse action for “lack of standing” was not a favorable termination on the merits for malicious prosecution purposes and affirm the trial court’s judgment of dismissal.

I. Background

Claire Eagleton died in July…

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.