Neville

Neville v. Chudacoff

Good Law
160 Cal. App. 4th 1255·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 356·73 Cal. Rptr. 3d 383·27 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 531
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2008No. B198253California5,549 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Mosk, J.

INTRODUCTION

This is an appeal from an order granting a special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute. (Code *1259 Civ. Proc., § 425.16.) 1 An employer fired one of its employees amid allegations that the employee had misappropriated customer lists and solicited his employer’s customers to start a competing business. Several months before litigation was commenced by the employer against its former employee, the employer’s attorney drafted a letter to the employer’s customers that accused the employee of breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets, and that “suggest[ed]” to the customers that, to avoid potential involvement in any ensuing litigation “as a material witness, or otherwise,” the customers should not do business with the former employee. The employee commenced a defamation action 2 against the former employer. We hold that, in the circumstances of this case, the lawyer’s letter to the customers was a “writing made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a . . . judicial body” (§ 425.16, subd. (e)(2)) and therefore covered by the anti-SLAPP statute because the letter…

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.