Tentative Ruling
Anthony Greenberg v. Diane Hayek, Case No. 19SMCV01899
Hearing Date JULY 9, 2020
Defendants’ Special Motion to Strike (Anti-SLAPP)
Plaintiff alleges defendant engaged in wrongful conduct to pressure him into leaving his rent-controlled apartment, including preventing him from using the garage, seeking to terminate his tenancy and making defamatory statements to other tenants. Defendant’s motion argues plaintiff’s allegation that “[d]efendants terminated Mr. Greenberg’s housing services required by contract in bad faith, as prohibited by Section 4.56.020(a)” constitutes protected litigation activity.
Courts resolving anti-SLAPP motions (Cal. Civ. Code §425.16) follow a two-step process. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche (2003) 31 Cal.4th 728, 733. In prong one, the court determines whether the conduct underlying the plaintiff’s cause of action arises from the defendant’s constitutional rights of free speech or petition. Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal. 5th 376, 395.
Hearing Date
July 09, 2020
Type
Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not unlawful detainer or wrongful eviction) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Tentative Ruling
Anthony Greenberg v. Diane Hayek, Case No. 19SMCV01899
Hearing Date JULY 9, 2020
Defendants’ Special Motion to Strike (Anti-SLAPP)
Plaintiff alleges defendant engaged in wrongful conduct to pressure him into leaving his rent-controlled apartment, including preventing him from using the garage, seeking to terminate his tenancy and making defamatory statements to other tenants. Defendant’s motion argues plaintiff’s allegation that “[d]efendants terminated Mr. Greenberg’s housing services required by contract in bad faith, as prohibited by Section 4.56.020(a)” constitutes protected litigation activity.
Courts resolving anti-SLAPP motions (Cal. Civ. Code §425.16) follow a two-step process. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche (2003) 31 Cal.4th 728, 733. In prong one, the court determines whether the conduct underlying the plaintiff’s cause of action arises from the defendant’s constitutional rights of free speech or petition. Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal. 5th 376, 395.