Legal Opinion

Davis v. Cox

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided April 7, 2014No. 71360-4-IPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDwyer, J.

¶1 To determine whether a pleaded cause of action falls within the ambit of Washington’s anti-SLAPP1 statutes, the trial court must decide whether the claim targets activity involving public participation and petition. To properly do so, the trial court must focus on the principal thrust or gravamen of the claim. A consideration of the relief sought by the party asserting the cause of action can be a determinative factor when resolving this question. Here, the plaintiffs’ prayer for relief included a request that the court order the defendants to cease activity protected by the First…

2Cases cited57 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Connick Ex Rel. Parish of Orleans v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926

52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Davis v. CoxWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Johnson v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  3. Baseball Club v. SDL Baseball Partners, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  4. Davis v. CoxWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Davis v. CoxWashington Supreme Court · 2015

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API