Steinberg

1-800 CONTACTS, INC. v. Steinberg

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 4th 568·132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 789·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 458·2003 Daily Journal DAR 3463·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2723
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 2003B157600California9,727 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cooper, J.

This appeal is from an order striking a complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuits against public participation) statute. The trial court ruled that plaintiff 1-800 Contacts, Inc.’s causes of action against defendant Craig S. Steinberg, for inducing breach of contract and “inducing breach of fiduciary and statutory duties,” arose from acts by Steinberg in furtherance of his constitutional rights of petition or free speech in connection with a public issue (§ 425.16, subds. (b)(1), (e)), and that plaintiff had failed, both factually and for legal reasons, to establish a probability of prevailing on either claim. (§ 425.16, subd. (b)(1).) Plaintiff contests both elements of the ruling, and also contends that the court reversibly erred by refusing to allow it to take Stein-berg’s deposition before deciding the motion to strike. We find plaintiffs various contentions unavailing, and affirm the order striking the complaint.

Facts

This lawsuit is an offshoot of a controversy between plaintiff, a discount direct seller of replacement contact lenses headquartered in Utah, and a former in-house attorney for plaintiff, Jerrald D.…

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.