Newport Harbor Ventures, LLC v. Morris Cerullo World Evangelism
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FYBEL, J.—
INTRODUCTION
A special motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, 1 is to be filed “within 60 days of the service of the complaint or, in the court’s discretion, at any later time upon terms it deems proper.” (§425.16, subd. (I).) 2 In this case, we address whether an anti-SLAPP motion was timely when it was filed within 60 days of service of a third amended complaint and no previous anti-SLAPP motion had been filed. We conclude the filing of an amended complaint does not automatically reopen the period for bringing an…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Norgart v. Upjohn Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Baral v. SchnittCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
- Crowley v. KatlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. DelfinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Williams Hicks v. Pga Tour, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Newport Harbor Ventures, LLC v. Morris Cerullo World EvangelismCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- Newport Harbor Offices & Marina, LLC v. Evangelism, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Copenbarger v. Morris Cerullo World Evangelism, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Al-Ahmed v. Twitter, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2022
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.