McCubbrey

J. Bruce McCubbrey, Donald L. Bartels, Virginia H. Meyer, Calvin B. Ward, and the law firm of McCubbrey, Bartels, Meyer & Ward (collectively “McCubbrey”) appeal the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in McCubbrey’s malicious prosecution action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, see Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp. 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 937 , 110 S.Ct. 3217 , 110 L.Ed.2d 664 (1990), and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The relevant undisputed facts show the following: McCubbrey filed an action against FMALI Herb Co. (“FMALI”) to collect legal fees arising out of McCubbrey’s representation of FMALI in another proceeding. FMALI, represented by defendants, filed a cross-complaint 2 against McCubbrey for, among other things, legal malpractice. On November 8, 1991, the parties settled both the complaint and cross-complaint.

*1055 DISCUSSION

To establish a cause of action for malicious prosecution in California, a plaintiff must show that “the prior proceeding, commenced by or at the direction of the malicious prosecution defendant, was (1) pursued to legal termination…