Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WERDEGAR, J.
The question presented is whether this malicious prosecution action is exempt from scrutiny under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (section 425.16), the anti-SLAPP 1 statute. We conclude it is not. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jarrow Formulas, Inc. (Jarrow), a manufacturer of vitamins and nutritional supplements, engaged defendant Sandra Hogan LaMarche (individually and doing business as The Network, hereafter LaMarche), a graphic designer, to design labels for its products. A dispute arose about the ownership of…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Silberg v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by313 opinions
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert HafifCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Sosa v. DIRECTV, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Zamos v. StroudCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Simpson Strong-Tie Co., Inc. v. GoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
308 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.