Michael Raynal v. National Audubon Society

MEMORANDUM

National Audubon Society (“Audubon”) challenges the denial of its motion to strike an action brought by neighboring Landowners for deceit, slander of title, and two forms of emotional distress arising from Audubon’s presentation of survey results of a property boundary. The Landowners cross-appeal the partial grant of summary judgment on most, but not all, of their claims. We review the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion de novo, Mindys Cosmetics, Inc. v. Dakar, 611 F.3d 590, 595 (9th Cir.2010), and we affirm, because Audubon’s speech and conduct arose from a private boundary dispute and were not connected to a public issue. We dismiss the cross-appeal because we lack jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a partial summary judgment order not inextricably intertwined with, or necessary to ensure meaningful review of, a matter properly before the Court.

The California anti-SLAPP statute allows parties to file a special motion to strike “lawsuits brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the redress of grievances.” CaLCiv. Proc.Code § 425.16(a). The first step in analyzing a defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion is…