Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope Opportunity

3 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Lead Article: Application of State Anti-SLAPP Laws in Federal Court

    Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLPJune 15, 2022

    (1999).This screening process, in effect, functions much like a motion for summary judgment, with the defendant being able to challenge the merits of a plaintiff’s case. One difference, however, is that the filing of a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute in California automatically stays discovery. See Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Oracle Corp., 239 Cal. App. 4th 1174, 1185 (2015); Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16(g). Another difference is that, unlike a motion for summary judgment, an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss places the burden on a plaintiff to demonstrate that they possess a “legally sufficient claim which is ‘substantiated,’ that is, supported by competent, admissible evidence.” College Hospital v. Super. Ct., 8 Cal. 4th 704, 718-719 (1994). If plaintiff is unable to satisfy their burden, then defendant is entitled to dismissal of the SLAPP suit, and an award of the attorneys’ fees and legal costs incurred defending the action. SeeBriggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity, 19 Cal. 4th 1106, 1121-1123 (1999); Church of Scientology v.Wollersheim, 42 Cal. App. 4th 628, 644 (1996); Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16(c). This “reverse” standard, which places the burden of proof on the plaintiff is intended to (1) allow defendants to obtain quick dismissals of claims arising out of certain “protected” activities, enumerated in California’s anti-SLAPP statute; and (2) discourage lawsuits filed with the intent to chill free speech (i.e. First Amendment-related conduct) by imposing the threat of significant legal fees and costs required to successfully oppose the motion so early in litigation (as well as the risk of paying for the other party’s legal fees and costs).In addition, unlike with a motion for summary judgment, a defendant is entitled to an automatic right of appeal for the denial of an anti-SLAPP motion, and a stay of all trial court proceedings affected by the motion. Hewlett-Packard, 239 Cal. App. 4th at 1185-86. “This means that however unsound an anti-SLAPP motion may be, it will typica

  2. Stormy Daniels’ Attorney May Have Fallen Into SLAPP Trap - Legal Analysis by BB&K Attorneys Damian Moos and Kandice Kim in Law360

    Best Best & Krieger LLPDamian MoosApril 13, 2018

    [2] Id., § 425.16(e); see Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity, 19 Cal. 4th 1106, 1115 (1999). [3] See Cal.

  3. How to Aggressively Defend Against Lender Liability Lawsuits

    Buchalter NemerOren BitanDecember 16, 2014

    6 Equilon Enterprises, LLC v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 67. 7 Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1106, 1123.