Dowling

Dowling v. Zimmerman

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 174·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 12·2001 Daily Journal DAR 347·85 Cal. App. 4th 1400·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 310
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 2001D032128, D032824California13,874 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 is California’s antiSLAPP suit (strategic lawsuits against public participation) statute (hereafter referred to as section 425.16 or the anti-SLAPP statute). The anti-SLAPP statute was specifically enacted to provide both a summary disposition and attorney fees and costs to defendants in such actions.

Plaintiff and appellant Peter Dowling (Dowling) appeals from a judgment dismissing his complaint against defendant and respondent Connie Zimmerman (Zimmerman) under the provisions of section 425.16, and awarding her, under subdivision (c) of that section, reasonable attorney fees in the amount of $9,300 and costs in the amount of $580. We hold that in order to effectuate the purpose of the anti-SLAPP statute and the Legislature’s intent to deter SLAPP suits, a defendant who appears in a SLAPP action in propria persona and later retains specially appearing counsel who successfully brings on behalf of the defendant a special motion to strike the complaint under section 425.16 is entitled to recover an award of reasonable attorney fees under the mandatory provisions of subdivision (c) of that section in order to compensate the retained…

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.