Rothman

Rothman v. Jackson

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 932·49 Cal. App. 4th 1134·57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 284·96 Daily Journal DAR 12054·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7350
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 1, 1996B092937California6,943 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

Barry K. Rothman and the Law Offices of Barry K. Rothman (hereafter, collectively, Rothman) appeal from judgments of dismissal entered in favor of Michael Jackson, MJJ Productions, Inc. (hereafter, collectively, Jackson), Bertram Fields, the Law Offices of Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman & Machtinger (Fields), Anthony Pellicano and the Pellicano Investigative Agency (Pellicano) in Rothman’s action for defamation, tortious interference with business relationships and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The judgments were entered after the defendants’ demurrers were sustained without leave to amend. The demurrers were sustained as to all causes of action solely on the ground of the litigation privilege in Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b).

We reverse. The challenged statements were made by the defendants in a press conference, and not in any context which the litigation privilege exists to protect. The privilege in section 47, subdivision (b) does not apply to the statements made in this case.

Factual and Procedural Background

The relevant facts in this case are taken from Rothman’s complaint and are deemed to be true. (See Moore v. Conliffe (1994) 7…

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.