Arrow Disposal Services v. Gronemeier & Associates CA2/2

Filed 12/16/21 Arrow Disposal Services v. Gronemeier & Associates CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

ARROW DISPOSAL B308001 SERVICES, INC., (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. 19PSCV00961) v.

GRONEMEIER & ASSOCIATES, PC, INC. et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Gloria L. White-Brown, Judge. Affirmed.

Evgeny Swarovski for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Law Office of Gronemeier & Hickambottom, Dale L. Gronemeier, and Elbie J. Hickambottom, Jr. for Defendants and Respondents. ****** In this lawsuit, a litigant from a prior case sued its adversary’s lawyers for their conduct in (1) explaining to a third party they had subpoenaed in the prior case the reasons for the subpoena, and (2) sending a letter with a settlement demand in the prior case. The trial court granted summary judgment to the lawyers, finding that their conduct fell squarely within the litigation privilege (Civ. Code, § 47), and thus was not actionable. This was undeniably correct, so we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts A. The prior case In December 2016, a construction and demolition debris hauler named Clean Up American, Inc. (Clean Up) sued one of its competitors, Arrow Disposal Services, Inc. (Arrow), for engaging in anticompetitive conduct—namely, illegally dumping waste meant for recycling facilities at regular landfills and covering its tracks by falsifying the weight tickets to conceal where the to-be- recycled waste had actually been dumped. Arrow filed a cross- claim alleging other anticompetitive conduct by Clean Up. B. Conduct by Clean Up’s counsel in the prior case In the prior case, Clean Up was represented by Elbie J. Hickambottom, Jr. (Hickambottom), who was at the time working at a law firm called Gronemeier and Associates, Inc. (the law firm). In late December 2017, Hickambottom sent Arrow a settlement demand letter that (1) outlined some of the evidence