Legal Opinion
Workman v. Colichman
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided April 2, 2019No. B285945; B288322PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
*1042INTRODUCTION
In providing an example of when Code of Civil Procedure, section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute,1 would not be applicable, one case offered this hypothetical: "Blackacre sells a house to Whiteacre, and Whiteacre sues, claiming defendant misrepresented the square footage. Blackacre brings a special motion to strike, claiming his speech involves a matter of public interest, because millions of Americans live in houses and buy and sell houses. ... [A]pplying the anti-SLAPP statute in such a case would be absurd." ( Consumer Justice Center v. Trimedica International, Inc . (2003) 107…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- City of Cotati v. CashmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. DelfinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
- Christian Research Institute v. AlnorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Alberto v. Cambrian HomecareCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
- Clarity Co. Consulting v. GabrielCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- Cook v. University of Southern CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- Desoto Cab Company v. Texas Insurance Company, et al.District Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Gazal v. EcheverryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.