Gore

SIMPSON STRONG-TIE CO., INC. v. Gore

Good Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 737·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 656·76 Cal. Rptr. 3d 292·36 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1833
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 2008H030444California11,616 words

Opinion

Opinion

Levy, Ram & Olson, Karl Olson, San Francisco, for Amicus Curiae Senator Sheila Kuehl et al.

An attorney published a newspaper advertisement stating that users of certain brand name galvanized screws under specified circumstances "may" have legal rights to compensation or other relief. The manufacturer of one of the named brands brought this action for defamation, trade libel, false advertising, and unfair business practices. We are called upon to decide: (1) Is this a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) so as to be subject to summary disposition under the anti-SLAPP law? (2) Is it exempt from that law as a statement "about" the attorney's services, or one made in the course of delivering those services? (3) If it is not exempt, has the manufacturer established that it is likely to prevail on the merits, so as to avoid dismissal?

The trial court answered these questions yes, no, and no, respectively. We find no error in these rulings, and will therefore affirm. In a companion appeal, we affirm the associated award of attorney fees to the defendant attorney.

In January 2006, defendant Pierce Gore caused an advertisement to appear in the San Jose…

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.