Collier

Collier v. Harris

Good Law
240 Cal. App. 4th 41
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 1, 2015G048735California6,002 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aronson, J.

Defendant and appellant Chris Korpi and plaintiff and respondent Julie Collier were active supporters of competing candidates in a local school board election. To educate voters about the candidates he supported, Korpi registered Collier’s name and the name of an advocacy group she formed as domain names, and then redirected all Internet users who visited those Web sites to the Web sites for the candidates he supported. Collier filed this action against Korpi, alleging he registered the domain names and illegally used them to mislead the public into thinking she supported his candidates.

Korpi moved to strike Collier’s complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16), which requires a plaintiff to present evidence establishing a probability of prevailing on the alleged claims if the defendant first shows the conduct on which the claims are based arose from constitutionally protected free speech or petition activities. The trial court denied Korpi’s motion because it found he failed to show Collier’s claims arose from free speech activities protected by the anti-SLAPP statute. Although the court acknowledged political commentary is the quintessential…

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.