Dubac

Dubac v. Itkoff

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 19, 2024B317061California5,061 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiley, J.

Filed 4/19/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

ROBERT DUBAC, B317061

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20SMCV02019 v.

SANDRA ITKOFF et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark H. Epstein, Judge. Affirmed. Rosen Saba, Todd M. Lander and Michael J. Peng for Plaintiff and Respondent. Brown, White & Osborn and Kenneth P. White for Defendants and Appellants. ____________________ In a six-unit building, one couple kept emailing insults about their neighbor. For anti-SLAPP purposes, this quarrel was not speech in connection with a public issue. Code cites are to the Code of Civil Procedure. I We recount facts. A Robert Dubac owned a condominium in the same six-unit building as Sandra Itkoff and Jonathan Diamond. We spell out nine statements by Itkoff and Diamond that Dubac claimed were actionable. (See Geiser v. Kuhns (2022) 13 Cal.5th 1238, 1252– 1256 [context is important] (Geiser).) The statements present the perspective of Itkoff and Diamond, who assert the bad blood with Dubac…

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.