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

Good Law
243 Cal. Rptr. 3d 880·6 Cal. 5th 931·434 P.3d 1152
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 2019S233526California6,103 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Corrigan, J.

*937 The narrow question here is what kind of evidence a court may consider in ruling on a pretrial anti-SLAPP motion in determining a plaintiff's probability of success. The inquiry has two aspects. One addresses the form in which the evidence is produced in connection with the motion. The other evaluates whether that evidence will be admissible at an eventual trial. We conclude the evidence produced by plaintiff Sweetwater Union High School District (the District) was properly considered and affirm the Court of Appeal's judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

In November 2006, voters approved Proposition O, a bond measure to fund capital improvements in the District. The District solicited bids to manage *938 various construction projects funded by the measure. It received seven proposals, including a joint submission from defendants Gilbane Building Company (Gilbane), The Seville Group, Inc. (SGI), and Gilbane/SGI, a joint venture (the Joint Venture). A screening committee selected three finalists. The final review committee, consisting of School Superintendent Jesus Gandara and three others, selected defendants' proposal as the winning bid. Gandara was authorized to negotiate a contract.…

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.