Bergman

Bergman v. Drum

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 4th 11·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 720·2005 Daily Journal DAR 5194·28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 112·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3830
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2005B174248California6,050 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

In this suit for malicious prosecution, plaintiff Rochelle Bergman appeals from a summary judgment granted to defendant Joel Drum (Drum). Plaintiff contends that the trial court’s granting of Drum’s motion for summary judgment is inconsistent with our ruling in a previous appeal in this case and thus violates the doctrine of law of the case.

In our previous opinion , we ruled that the trial court had properly denied Drum’s Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 “anti-SLAPP” motion to strike plaintiff’s complaint. We ruled that, as a matter of law, the evidence presented by the parties in connection with that motion demonstrated that plaintiff had made out a prima facie case against Drum for malicious prosecution of a prior suit in which he had represented an insurance company in his capacity as an attorney. Specifically, we held that there was evidence “from which a trier of fact could find in [plaintiff’s] favor on all three elements” of a cause of action for malicious prosecution, including that (1) the prior lawsuit against plaintiff, filed by Drum on behalf of his insurance company client, had been terminated favorably to plaintiff, (2) the prior suit against…

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.