| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
MOTION TO STRIKE Amended COMPLAINT
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for Sept 9, 2025. Line 4. DEFENDANT ELIZABETH PAPPY AN INDIVIDUAL, MAXWELL BLUM MOTION TO STRIKE Amended COMPLAINT is DENIED.
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants Pappy and Blum represented them, to some extent. While Defendants' conduct may have been protected activity as to a nonparty, conduct amounting to malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, etc., with respect to an alleged client does not "arise out of" protected activity within the meaning of CCP 425.16 because the gravamen of the claim is not the petitioning activity itself but the breach of duty. (See, e.g., Sprengel v. Zbylut (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 140.) Therefore, the motion must be denied, under the first prong of the Anti-SLAPP analysis.
While Defendants Pappy and Blum have submitted declarations stating that they honestly believed they did not represent or owe any duty to the Plaintiffs, the question of whether or not they nonetheless owed Plaintiffs a duty is central to all of the claims asserted against Defendants Pappy and Blum. Under the first prong of the Anti-SLAPP analysis, the Court does not consider the veracity of Plaintiffs' claims, nor does it consider merits-based arguments. (Sprengel, 241 Cal.App.4th at 156.) Accordingly, the Court's analysis stops at the first prong, and the Court makes no determination regarding Plaintiffs' likelihood of prevailing on the merits of their claims. =(501/SKF)
Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849).
Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.
Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”