Brighton Collectibles, LLC v. Hockey

Filed 6/3/21 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

BRIGHTON COLLECTIBLES, 2d Civ. No. B307235 LLC, (Super. Ct. No. 19CV06616) (Santa Barbara County) Cross-complainant and Appellant,

v.

NATALIE HOCKEY,

Cross-defendant and Respondent.

Natalie Hockey directed her modeling agency to negotiate a contract on her behalf with Brighton Collectibles, LLC. They agreed that Brighton would pay Hockey $3,000 for a one-day photoshoot. They also agreed on how and when payment would be made. After the photoshoot, Brighton paid Hockey according to the terms of their contract. But Hockey wanted more for her single day of work. She sued Brighton, alleging that Brighton failed to comply with state law despite adhering to the terms of the contract it negotiated with her own agent. She claimed she

was due the full $3,000 on the day of the shoot, and Brighton’s failure to pay entitled her to $90,000. Here we decide that such deceit, if proven at trial, does not entitle her to a bonus. Brighton appeals from the trial court’s order granting Hockey’s anti-SLAPP motion to strike Brighton’s cross-claim for fraud. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16.) Brighton contends the court’s order should be vacated because: (1) Hockey did not show that Brighton’s cross-claim arose out of protected conduct, rendering the anti-SLAPP statute inapplicable, and (2) even if the anti- SLAPP statute does apply, Brighton produced prima facie evidence in support of its claim. We vacate the trial court’s order. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Hockey is a fashion model. She was represented by LA Models, Inc. Their agreement provided that LA Models would negotiate contracts for Hockey and collect payment on her behalf. Brighton designs, manufactures, and sells women’s fashion accessories. In October 2018 Brighton selected Hockey to model some of its products. Brighton negotiated an agreement with LA Models that provided that Hockey would participate in a one-day, 10-hour-long photoshoot in exchange for $3,000 and specified usage rights. The agreement also provided that LA Models would invoice Brighton for Hockey’s work, that Brighton would pay LA Models, and that LA Models would pay Hockey. The invoice would direct Brighton to “make checks payable to L.A. Models, Inc.” These terms were consistent with standard industry practice. The photoshoot took place on October 4. LA Models invoiced Brighton for Hockey’s work on October 29. The invoice