Legal Opinion

Major v. Silna

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 20, 2005No. B176846PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CURRY, J.

After respondent Wade Major voluntarily dismissed his action for injunctive relief against appellant Ozzie Silna, the trial court denied Silna’s request for attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 1 —the law curtailing the filing of strategic lawsuits against public participation, often called the “anti-SLAPP law.” We reverse and remand for a determination of the award.

RELEVANT FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The parties do not dispute the following facts: The City of Malibu has enacted its own campaign finance law, codified in chapter 2.20 of the Malibu…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
  3. California Teachers Ass'n v. Governing Board of Rialto Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarcheCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Wilson v. Parker, Covert & ChidesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Simpson Strong-Tie Co., Inc. v. GoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. People v. AriasCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Hawran v. HixsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  4. San Diegans for Open Gov't v. San Diego State Univ. Research Found., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  5. City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

18 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