Huber

Dealertrack, Inc. v. Huber

Good Law
460 F. Supp. 2d 1177·2006 WL 3187305
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaOctober 26, 2006CV06-23385 AGFMOXCalifornia3,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

Guilford, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-CLAIM DEFENDANT DEALERTRACK’S (1) SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE (2) MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, AND (3) MOTION TO STRIKE ON GROUNDS OF INSUFFICIENCY

This case puts this Court in the middle of a stream of jurisprudence threatening to flood courts with lawsuits spawning lawsuits breeding still further judicial proceedings. Here, a lawsuit about intellectual property claims now involves claims of libel, and the California Anti-SLAPP statute at California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The matter now focuses on one sentence in a twenty-one page complaint. The sentence alleges, on information and belief, general allegations of financial misconduct in a complaint concerning infringement of intellectual property. Because this allegation has sufficient connection to the action as a whole, occurring in a complaint, the Court finds it is protected by the litigation privilege and therefore strikes Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs’ libel claim. Complaint allegations should not so easily be allowed to spawn libel actions. But California law allows such a libel action to breed an Anti-SLAPP motion which must be…

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.