Birkner

Birkner v. Lam

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 4th 275·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1733·67 Cal. Rptr. 3d 190
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 20, 2007No. A116262California4,501 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Pollak, J.

*278 Opinion

Defendant Kwai Ho Lam appeals from the denial of his special motion to strike the complaint of plaintiffs Regina Birkner, Nyri Scanlon, Charles Birkner, and William Rogers Burton as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 1 section 425.16 (commonly known as the anti-SLAPP statute). The trial court determined plaintiffs’ causes of action were not based upon petitioning activity protected by section 425.16. We disagree, and remand the matter for further proceedings.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The four causes of action in the complaint, designated wrongful eviction-violation of a rent ordinance, negligence, breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, are all based on the following factual allegations. Plaintiffs are tenants of a single unit in a San Francisco apartment building owned by Lam 2 under a month-to-month rental agreement. The tenancy is subject to the San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance, San Francisco Administrative Code, chapter 37, originally enacted on June 13, 1979 (Rent Ordinance). At issue is Rent Ordinance…

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.