Legal Opinion

Paul for Council v. Hanyecz

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 5, 2001No. B140077PublishedCited by 80 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, Acting P. J.

In this appeal, plaintiff challenges the determination of the trial court that plaintiff’s suit is what is commonly known as a SLAPP suit (strategic lawsuit against public participation [Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16 (section 425.16)]). Based on such determination, the trial court struck plaintiff’s complaint and dismissed the suit when plaintiff failed to establish a probability of success on his claims. Thereafter, defendants, who are Ricki Hanyecz, Michael Hanyecz, and Sima Katzir, moved for an award of attorney’s fees and costs. The court granted defendants’…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Ryder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  5. Wilcox v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994

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

3Cited by80 opinions

  1. Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert HafifCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Wilson v. Parker, Covert & ChidesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002

75 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