Urological Medical Assocs. v. Yamauchi CA2/4

INTRODUCTION

Appellant Urological Medical Associates (UMA), a medical partnership, filed a complaint against one of its partners, respondent Dr. Mark Tamarin, alleging that Tamarin had engaged in Medicare fraud and seeking to remove him from the partnership. Tamarin filed a cross-complaint against UMA, his partners, appellants Drs. George Yamauchi, Nickolas Tomasic, and Sameer Malhotra (collectively, the Appellant Partners)—and two of UMA’s attorneys, Steven Goldsobel and Jeremy Miller. Tamarin’s cross-complaint denied that he committed Medicare fraud and alleged that the Appellant Partners had fabricated that claim (and related FBI investigation) to expel him from the partnership. The cross-defendants moved to strike the cross-complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute.1 The trial court denied the motions as to UMA and the Appellant Partners, concluding that Tamarin’s claims arose out of an internal investigation and disciplinary action by a business entity; thus, UMA’s conduct did not qualify for protection under the statute. However, the court granted Goldsobel’s motion, reasoning that his conduct directly related to anticipated litigation.…