Sweetwater Union Sch. Dist. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co.

Good Law
199 Cal. Rptr. 3d 659·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 137·245 Cal. App. 4th 19·16 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2103
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 2016D067383California11,972 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Aaron, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

*24 Plaintiff Sweetwater Union High School District (Sweetwater) filed this action against defendants Gilbane Building Company (Gilbane), The Seville Group, Inc. (SGI), and Gilbane/SGI, a joint venture (the Joint Venture), seeking to void management contracts with all three entities, and to require that they disgorge all sums that Sweetwater paid them under the contracts, pursuant to Government Code section 1090(Section 1090). 1 Sweetwater alleges that certain *25 representatives of the defendant entities engaged in a "pay to play" scheme with several Sweetwater officials that involved paying for expensive dinners, tickets to entertainment and sporting events, and travel expenses, and making contributions to political campaigns and charities, in an effort to influence the officials to award defendants certain construction contracts.

Gilbane and the Joint Venture (jointly, defendants) brought a special motion to strike (or "anti-SLAPP motion") under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(the SLAPP Act). 2 The trial court denied the motion on the ground that the conduct underlying the complaint was illegal as a matter of law, and therefore, was not protected by…

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.