Wollersheim

Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim

Bad Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 87·42 Cal. App. 4th 628·49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 620·96 Daily Journal DAR 1162·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 773
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 1996Docket Nos. B084686, B086063California10,384 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

Introduction

Plaintiff and appellant Church of Scientology (the Church) appeals from the order of the trial court granting the motion of defendant and respondent Lawrence Wollersheim (Wollersheim) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (hereinafter, section 425.16) to dismiss the Church’s complaint against him. The dismissed complaint attacked the judgment Wollersheim had obtained against the Church in a prior action (the prior action). Section 425.16 was adopted in 1992 to deter and prevent so-called SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits.

The Church contends the trial court erred in granting the motion because its action against Wollersheim is not a SLAPP suit as defined by section 425.16. The Church also contends the Church demonstrated the probability of the success of its complaint and therefore the motion should have been denied in any event. Furthermore, the Church contends, the amount awarded for attorney fees was excessive.

We find the motion to dismiss was properly granted and substantial evidence supports the award of attorney fees. We therefore affirm the judgments.

Factual and Procedural Background

The Prior Action

The…

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.