Robles

Robles v. Chalilpoyil

Good Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 628·181 Cal. App. 4th 566·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 94
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2010H033329California6,001 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elia, J.

—Virginia Robles and members of her family filed an action against their former attorneys and appellant Purush Chalilpoyil, alleging negligence and conspiracy to commit fraud. Appellant moved to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) law, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (hereafter, section 425.16), but the superior court denied the motion. Appellant seeks review, contending that the conduct on which the complaint is based consists of communications protected by section 425.16. We disagree and affirm the order.

Background

Respondents are family members of John Robles, who burned to death when his wheelchair ignited while he was occupying it. In December 2004 respondents initiated an action for wrongful death against Golden State Medical Supply, Pride Mobility Products Corp., and others (the Robles v. GSMS case). Thomas Wills and C. Denise Benoit (collectively, the Wills attorneys or the Wills firm), represented respondents in that lawsuit. Thomas Wills retained appellant to provide expert consulting services and testimony.

According to the complaint in the present case, trial in Robles v. GSMS was scheduled for…

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.