§Why CasetextPricing

Lauren Sun v. Siemens AG et al

MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION to Strike

19 Cited authorities

  1. Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope Opportunity

    19 Cal.4th 1106 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 1,068 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that anti-SLAPP motions brought "to strike a cause of action arising from a statement made before, or in connection with an issue under consideration by, a legally authorized official proceeding need not separately demonstrate that the statement concerned an issue of public significance."

  2. Family Home v. Federal

    525 F.3d 822 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 458 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California's common interest privilege applies to disclosure of names on Exclusionary List

  3. Kashian v. Harriman

    98 Cal.App.4th 892 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 439 times
    Holding that even the "fil[ing] [of] meritless lawsuits on behalf of 'sham plaintiffs'" was "essentially communicative conduct" to which the litigation privilege applied, "even though it also may have involved noncommunicative acts"

  4. Hagberg v. California Federal Bank FSB

    32 Cal.4th 350 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 392 times
    Holding that civilians who provide information leading to an arrest cannot be held liable for false arrest

  5. Neville v. Chudacoff

    160 Cal.App.4th 1255 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 267 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to be privileged under section 47, a statement must be "reasonably relevant" to pending or contemplated litigation

  6. Rubin v. Green

    4 Cal.4th 1187 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 394 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "communications with 'some relation' to judicial proceedings" are absolutely immune from tort liability by the litigation privilege

  7. Dove Audio, Inc. v. Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman

    47 Cal.App.4th 777 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 330 times
    Holding that "communications preliminary to the institution of an official proceeding come within the privilege of" section 47(b)

  8. Robertson v. Rodriguez

    36 Cal.App.4th 347 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 128 times
    Applying clear and convincing standard of proof where plaintiff had to prove actual malice by that standard

  9. Maranatha Corrections, LLC v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

    158 Cal.App.4th 1075 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 53 times
    In Maranatha, a private firm sued the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), a state executive branch department, based on alleged defamatory statements made by the CDCR in a publicized letter (and subsequent oral comments made by an employee) explaining the reasons it was terminating its contract with the firm (i.e., the firm misappropriated funds).

  10. Beilenson v. Superior Court

    44 Cal.App.4th 944 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 75 times
    Finding opinion that plaintiff's conduct was a "rip-off" to be rhetorical hyperbole

  11. Section 425.16 - California anti-SLAPP law

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16   Cited 2,810 times   110 Legal Analyses
    Reversing district court's denial of anti-SLAPP motion as moot and remanding for consideration of the motion, including attorney's fees

  12. Section 340 - Penalty or forfeiture; libel, slander, false imprisonment, seduction, payment on forged check, neglect of animal; officer seizing property; good faith improver

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340   Cited 1,565 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Providing a one-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims arising prior to January 1, 2003