Baral

Baral v. Schnitt

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 2015B253620California7,644 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 2/5/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

ROBERT C. BARAL, B253620

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC475350) v.

DAVID SCHNITT,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Maureen Duffy-Lewis, Judge. Affirmed. Ervin Cohen & Jessup, Michael C. Lieb and Leemore L. Kushner for Defendant and Appellant Sauer & Wagner, Gerald L. Sauer and Amir A. Torkamani for Plaintiff and Respondent

____________________________________________ This is an appeal from an order denying a special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure, section 425.16.1 We are asked to add our voice to the growing debate among appellate districts as to whether section 425.16 (anti-SLAPP statute) authorizes excision of allegations subject to the anti-SLAPP statute (protected activity) in a cause of action that also contains meritorious allegations not within the purview of that statute (mixed cause of action). The trial court applied appellate and Supreme Court authority holding that the statute does…

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.