Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 22STCV37020, Date: 2023-03-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV37020    Hearing Date: March 22, 2023    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

            Defendants’ special motion to strike is GRANTED.

            On 11/23/2022, Plaintiff Edward Lacour (Plaintiff) filed this suit.

            Now, Vendome Palms, LP, a Community of Friends, Deide Mosley, Kim Garibaldi, Belinda Hatcher, and Ada R. Cordero-Sacks move to special strike portions of Plaintiff’s motion.

            The motion is unopposed.

Legal Standard

On a special motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, also known as an anti-SLAPP motion, moving parties have the initial burden to demonstrate that a cause of action is subject to a special motion to strike. (Martinez v. Metabolife Inter. Ins. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 181, 186; Fox Searchlight Pictures Inc. v. Paladino (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 294, 304.) First, the court must determine whether moving parties have made a prima facie showing that the attacked claims arise from a protected activity, including defendants’ right of petition, or free speech, under a constitution, in connection with issues of public interest. (Healy v. Tuscany Hills Landscape & Recreation Corp., (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 1, 5; Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif (2006) 39 Cal.4th 260, 278; Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (e).) Moving parties can satisfy this burden by showing (1) statements made before legislative, executive or judicial proceedings, or made in connection with matters being considered in such proceedings, or (2) statements made in a public forum, or other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional rights of petition or free speech, in connection with issues of public interest. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (e); Equilon Ent., LLC v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 66.) 

If the court finds this showing has been made, it must dismiss the cause of action unless the plaintiff meets its burden to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on the claim. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (b)(1); Balzaga v. Fox News Network, LLC (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1325, 1336.) This means that the plaintiff must state a legally sufficient claim and must then present evidence that substantiates or sustains the claim. (Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 61; see also Wilson v. Parker, Covert & Chidester (2002) 28 Cal.4th 811, 821 [plaintiff “must demonstrate that the complaint is both legally sufficient and supported by a sufficient prima facie showing of facts to sustain a favorable judgment if the evidence submitted by the plaintiff is credited”].) 

Discussion

            Defendants argue that portions of Plaintiff’s claim arise out of protected activity and are barred by the litigation privilege.

            The Court agrees. Plaintiff’s claim arises, in part, out of prosecution of an unlawful detainer, and Plaintiff’s eviction from his residence. Prosecution of an unlawful detainer is “indisputably” protected activity under anti-SLAPP law. (Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1106, 111 (communications preparatory to or in anticipation of action are protected activities under anti-SLAPP law].)

            Accordingly, the burden shifts to Plaintiff to show a probability of prevailing on the merits. Plaintiff failed to oppose this motion, and thus is considered to have conceded to the merits of Defendants’ motion.

            Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ special motion to strike is granted.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  March    , 2023

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. 

            Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.  Parties, counsel, and court reporters present are subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied entry if admission could create a public health risk.  The court encourages the parties wishing to argue to appear via L.A. Court Connect.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.  Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.