Legal Opinion
Slauson Partnership v. Ochoa
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 6, 2003No. B162900PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MUÑOZ (Aurelio), J.
Richard Ochoa (Ochoa) appeals from an order denying his special motion to strike plaintiffs’ complaint under Code of Civil Procedure 1 section 425.16. 2 He contends that free speech activities in protest of an adult strip theater at plaintiffs’ minimall are protected by the California Constitution’s free speech clause, which allows access to privately owned commercial facilities open to the public for purposes of expressive activity (Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center (1979) 23 Cal.3d 899 [153 Cal.Rptr. 854, 592 P.2d 341]). Furthermore, he argues that because the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Hudgens v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Lloyd Corp. v. TannerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert HafifCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Hecimovich v. Encinal School Parent Teacher OrganizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Thomas v. QuinteroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Kimoanh Nguyen-Lam v. Sinh Cuong CaoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.