Canyon View Estates v. Federal Deposit Insurance

Good Law
472 F. App'x 493
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 201210-55065California1,437 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Canyon View Estates (“Canyon View”) sued Defendants Homeside Lending (“Homeside”) and Homeside’s Attorneys (“the Attorneys”) for malicious prosecution. Homeside and the Attorneys filed anti-SLAPP motions to strike the pleadings pursuant to Cal. Civ.Proc. Code § 425.16 (b)(2). The trial court denied Homeside’s anti-SLAPP motion and granted the Attorneys’ anti-SLAPP motion.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., as the receiver of Homeside, appeals the denial of Homeside’s anti-SLAPP motion. Canyon View appeals the grant of the Attorneys’ anti-SLAPP motion. This court has jurisdiction over a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion as an appealable interlocutory order, and a grant of an anti-SLAPP motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . See Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018, 1024 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm the grant of the Attorneys’ anti-SLAPP motion, reverse the denial of Homeside’s anti-SLAPP motion, and remand to the district court.

1. Standard of Review — We apply the same rules that California state courts apply in ruling on an anti-SLAPP motion. See Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d 1097, 1109 (9th Cir.2003). We review an anti-SLAPP ruling de novo. Id. at 1102. We…

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.