Sparks v. CBS News CA2/4

California Court of Appeal Oct 27, 2014 No. B254434Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff's libel and emotional distress claims, holding that the news article reporting on a judicial proceeding was protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute and was absolutely privileged as a fair and true report.

Issues

Whether a news article reporting on a judicial proceeding constitutes protected activity under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.
Whether the plaintiff demonstrated a probability of prevailing on his claims.
Whether the news article was protected by the 'fair and true report' privilege under Civil Code section 47, subdivision (d).

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is well established that publishing a news article that reports on statements made during a judicial or other official proceeding constitutes protected activity under section 425.16, subdivision (e).”

“the article captured the substance or gist of the court proceeding and was absolutely privileged under section 47(d).”

Filed 10/27/14 Sparks v. CBS News CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

PHIL SPARKS, B254434

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC513939) v.

CBS NEWS INC.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, Ruth Ann Kwan, Judge. Affirmed. Phil Sparks, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Mitchell and John J. Lucas for Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff Phil Sparks appeals from the dismissal of his lawsuit against defendant CBS News Inc. (CBS), after the trial court granted CBS’s special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (section 425.16). We affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND On July 2, 2013, Sparks filed a complaint against CBS, alleging claims for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress, based upon an article CBS published on August 14, 2012. The article described a hearing in the superior court in which the court granted a restraining order against Sparks, ordering him to stay 300 yards away from singer-songwriter Sheryl Crow and film executive Harvey Weinstein. The complaint alleges the article contained three defamatory statements: (1) that a union representative said that Sparks told her he was going to shoot Crow and Weinstein; (2) that forensic psychiatrist Dr. David Glaser interviewed Sparks and determined Sparks was “imminently dangerous”; and (3) that Dr. Glaser made a diagnosis that Sparks is “unambiguously delusional.” The complaint alleges these statements are false because Sparks never told anyone he was going to shoot Crow or Weinstein, and Dr. Glaser only spoke briefly to Sparks in a casual conversation, and did not interview him in any professional capacity. The complaint also alleges that the article was not a fair and accurate report of the court proceedings because it failed to include facts favorable to Sparks. CBS filed a special motion to strike (a so-called anti-SLAPP motion) under section 425.16.1 CBS argued that Sparks’ complaint arises out of protected

Sparks v. CBS News CA2/4

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

PHIL SPARKS, B254434

CBS NEWS INC.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

MANELLA, J.

COLLINS, J.

AI Brief