21 Cited authorities

Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA
317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 4,198 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims
City of Cotati v. Cashman
29 Cal.4th 69 (Cal. 2002) Cited 1,264 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding "the mere fact an action was filed after protected activity took place does not mean it arose from that activity"; rejecting defendant's argument that plaintiff's complaint "arose" from defendant's having previously filed lawsuit, where plaintiff's complaint "contain[ed] no reference to the [defendant's] action"
American Insurance Association v. Garamendi
539 U.S. 396 (2003) Cited 223 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that treaties are "[s]ubject ... to the Constitution's guarantees of individual rights"
Episcopal Church Cases
45 Cal.4th 467 (Cal. 2009) Cited 315 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that in consideration of Dennis Canon and parish's promise to be bound by constitution and canons of general church in original application in 1947 to become parish and in articles of incorporation in 1949, parish held property in trust for general church and could use property only so long as parish remained part of general church
Batzel v. Smith
333 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 359 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion is appealable under § 1291
Hilton v. Hallmark Cards
580 F.3d 874 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 234 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that pendent jurisdiction is unavailable over a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b) in an appeal from a denial of a motion to strike under an anti-SLAPP statute
Mindys Cosmetics, Inc. v. Dakar
611 F.3d 590 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 165 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding registration of another's trademark was attempt to exert ownership over property
Doe v. Gangland Prods., Inc.
730 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2013) Cited 79 times 3 Legal Analyses
Noting that, under California law, "[t]he elements of fraud are misrepresentation; knowledge of falsity; intent to defraud; justifiable reliance; and resulting damage"
National Foreign Trade Council v. Natsios
181 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 1999) Cited 110 times
Finding preemption where state legislation affected foreign affairs
Santa Monica Rent Control Board v. Pearl Street
109 Cal.App.4th 1308 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 71 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Pearl Street, a rent control board sought a judicial determination of the maximum rent defendant landlords could charge for two apartments, and the landlords brought an anti-SLAPP motion.
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 486,525 times 688 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
Section 1331 - Federal question
28 U.S.C. § 1331 Cited 97,351 times 134 Legal Analyses
Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
Section 425.16 - California anti-SLAPP law
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 Cited 2,828 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
Section 4.24.500 - Good faith communication to government agency-Legislative findings-Purpose
Wash. Rev. Code § 4.24.500 Cited 49 times
Setting forth the purpose of the Act and stating that “[t]he purpose of RCW 4.24.500 through 4.24.520 is to protect individuals who make good-faith reports to appropriate governmental bodies ”

Michiko Shiota Gingery, et al v. City of Glendale et al

21 Cited authorities

Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

Holding that treaties are "[s]ubject ... to the Constitution's guarantees of individual rights"

Holding that the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion is appealable under § 1291

Holding that pendent jurisdiction is unavailable over a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b) in an appeal from a denial of a motion to strike under an anti-SLAPP statute

Holding registration of another's trademark was attempt to exert ownership over property

Noting that, under California law, "[t]he elements of fraud are misrepresentation; knowledge of falsity; intent to defraud; justifiable reliance; and resulting damage"

Finding preemption where state legislation affected foreign affairs

In Pearl Street, a rent control board sought a judicial determination of the maximum rent defendant landlords could charge for two apartments, and the landlords brought an anti-SLAPP motion.

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

Reversing district court's denial of anti-SLAPP motion as moot and remanding for consideration of the motion, including attorney's fees

Setting forth the purpose of the Act and stating that “[t]he purpose of RCW 4.24.500 through 4.24.520 is to protect individuals who make good-faith reports to appropriate governmental bodies ”