Purdom
Purdom v. Xu CA2/4
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
This case involves a malicious prosecution lawsuit arising out of a medical malpractice action. In the underlying medical malpractice lawsuit, appellants Ying Xu, Law Offices of Eric K. Chen, Eric Chen, Samantha Larsen, and Kaleigh Ragon (collectively, the Attorneys) represented patient Ying Hong Zhang against respondent Kenneth Purdom, M.D. At the close of Zhang’s evidence during the bench trial of the malpractice action, the trial court granted Purdom’s motion for judgment. Purdom then filed a malicious prosecution action against the Attorneys and Zhang,1 arguing that their failure to retain an expert to support the medical malpractice claims demonstrated that the lawsuit was filed and pursued without probable cause and with malice. The Attorneys filed a special motion to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.2 The trial court denied the motion. The parties do not dispute that the Attorneys met step one of the anti-SLAPP statute, as Purdom’s malicious prosecution claim arises out of protected activity under section 425.16. But the Attorneys challenge the trial court’s finding that, as to step two, Purdom had…