Legal Opinion
Alaska Structures, Inc. v. Hedlund
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided April 21, 2014No. 69349-2-IPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Grosse, J.*
¶1 To succeed on a special motion to strike under Washington’s anti-SLAPP statute,1 the moving party must make an initial prima facie showing that the claimant’s suit arises from an act in furtherance of his right of petition or free speech in connection with a matter of public concern. If the movant does not meet that threshold, then the anti-SLAPP motion is dismissed. Here, the plaintiff, Alaska Structures Inc., brought an action against the defendant, Charles Hedlund, for violating a confidentiality agreement. The gravamen of the complaint is not whether there was a violation of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Connick Ex Rel. Parish of Orleans v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hutchinson v. ProxmireSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Time, Inc. v. FirestoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Baseball Club v. SDL Baseball Partners, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Alaska Structures, Inc. v. HedlundWashington Supreme Court · 2016
- Johnson v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Johnson v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.