PARK 100 INVESTMENT GROUP II, LLC v. Ryan
California Court of Appeal
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ALDRICH, J.
I
INTRODUCTION
Defendants in this case are attorneys who, in the course of representing a real property owner in a prior lawsuit involving an easement dispute, filed a lis pendens on a dominant tenement. The owners of the dominant tenement turned around and, in the present case, sued the attorneys, claiming the lis pendens was wrongfully recorded. The attorneys appeal from the denial of their anti-SLAPP motion (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16).
In the published portions of this opinion, we hold that it is proper to record a notice of pendency of action, commonly called a lis pendens,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert HafifCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Albertson v. RaboffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Della Penna v. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- La Jolla Group II v. BruceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Alpha & Omega Development, LP v. Whillock Contracting, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Zhang v. Jenevein, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Pedersen v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2012
- Popovich v. WeingartenDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.