- Gallagher v. Connell
(2004, 2d District – 123 Cal.App.4th 1260, 20 Cal.Rptr.3d 673) - Evidence that is normally inadmissible may, if no objections are raised, be considered by the court in determining whether a plaintiff challenged by an anti-SLAPP motion has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the complaint.
- Gallanis-Politis v. Medina
(2007, 2d District – 152 Cal.App.4th 600, 61 Cal.Rptr.3d 701) - Gallano v. Burlington Coat Factory of California, LLC
(2021, 1st District – 67 Cal.App.5th 953, 282 Cal.Rptr.3d 748) - Gallant v. City of Carson
(2005, 2d District – 128 Cal.App.4th 705, 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 318) - Gallant alleged she was terminated as general manager of the city after she reported misdeeds of a city attorney and that, prior to her termination, employees of the city had made public defamatory remarks about her competency as general manager. She sued the city for defamation and wrongful termination. City filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike the complaint for defamation, which the trial court granted. The appellate court reverses on the grounds that Gallant had demonstrated a probability of prevailing on her claim.
- Gallimore v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
(2002, 2d District – 102 Cal.App.4th 1388, 126 Cal.Rptr.2d 560) - Gallimore sought damages from State Farm for alleged misconduct in handling his claims. The company filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike the complaint, arguing that Gallimore’s allegations were based on reports that the company had filed with the state’s Department of Insurance. The trial court granted the motion. The appellate court reverses on the grounds that the lower court, and State Farm, had confused allegations of wrongdoing with the evidence required to prove them.
- Garcia v. Rosenberg
(2019, 5th District – 42 Cal.App.5th 1050, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 377) - The Garment Workers Center v. Superior Court
(2004, 2d District – 117 Cal.App.4th 1156, 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 506) - In this companion case to Fashion 21 v. Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, the appellate court considered whether the trial court had “good cause” to lift the stay on discovery required when an anti-SLAPP motion is filed. Before hearing defendants’ special motion to strike plaintiffs’ libel claim, the trial court permitted plaintiffs to conduct discovery on the issue of actual malice. The appellate court concludes that the trial court absued its discretion in allowing discovery on actual malice before first determining whether plaintiffs had a reasonable probability of establishing the other elements of libel.
- Garretson v. Post
(2007, 4th District – 156 Cal.App.4th 1508, 68 Cal.Rptr.3d 230) - Gaynor v. Bulen
(2018, 4th District – 19 Cal.App.5th 864, 228 Cal.Rptr.3d 243) - GeneThera, Inc. v. Troy & Gould Professional Corp.
(2009, 2d District – 171 Cal.App.4th 901, 90 Cal.Rptr.3d 218)
Geragos v Abelyan
(2023, 2d District – 88 Cal.App.5th 1005, 305 Cal.Rptr. 3d 303) - Gerbosi et al. v. Gaims, Weil, West & Epstein
(2011, 2d District – 193 Cal.App.4th 435, 122 Cal.Rptr.3d 73) - GetFugu, Inc. v. Patton Boggs
(2013, 2d District – 220 Cal.App.4th 141, 162 Cal.Rptr.3d 831) - Ghafur v. Bernstein
(2005, 1st District – 131 Cal.App.4th 1230, 32 Cal.Rptr.3d 626) - Defendants wrote a letter to the state superintendent of education concerning Ghafur and the charter schools he managed. The letter urged an investigation of religious instruction in the schools and a link to an Islamic terrorist organization. Ghafur sued defendants for defamation. The trial court granted defendants’ special motion to strike the complaint. The appellate court affirms on the grounds that Ghafur was unlikely to prevail on his complaint. Ghafur, as a public official, was required to proffer clear and convincing evidence that defendants acted with malice and he had not.
- Gilbert v. Sykes
(2007, 3d District – 147 Cal.App.4th 13, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 752) - Golden Eagle Land Investment, L.P. v. Rancho Santa Fe Association
(2018, 4th District – 19 Cal.App.5th 399, 227 Cal.Rptr.3d 903) -
Golden Gate Land Holdings LLC et al. v. Direct Action Everywhere
(2022, 1st District – 81 Cal.App.5th 82, 296 Cal.Rptr.3d 768) - Golden State Seafood, Inc. v. Schloss
(2020, 2d District – 53 Cal.App.5th 21, 266 Cal.Rptr.3d 608) - Goldstein v. Ralphs Grocery Co.
(2004, 2d District – 122 Cal.App.4th 229, 19 Cal.Rptr.3d 292) - In a class action Ralphs Grocery filed an anti-SLAPP motion, which was denied by the trial court on the grounds that the various causes of action did not arise from conduct protected by the First Amendment, and in any case class actions are exempt from the special motion to strike under the state’s anti-SLAPP statute. Defendant filed a writ petition, which was summarily denied. It then filed a notice of appeal. The court dismisses the appeal. Held: When a special motion to strike is denied on the grounds the cause of action is exempt from the anti-SLAPP statute procedures, the right of immediate appeal under the statute is inapplicable.
- Gotterba v. Travolta
(2014, 2d District – 228 Cal.App.4th 35, 175 Cal.Rptr.3d 131) - The Governor Gray Davis Committee v. American Taxpayers Alliance
(2002, 1st District – 102 Cal.App.4th 449, 125 Cal.Rptr.2d 534) - The Taxpayers Alliance paid for a television ad critical of Davis. After the ad was broadcast, the Davis Committee sued for injunctive relief, seeking to compel the Alliance to comply with disclosure and reporting requirements of the Political Reform Act of 1974. The Alliance filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike the complaint, which was denied by the trial court. The appellate court reverses on the grounds that the financing of the TV ad was activity protected by the First Amendment and the Davis Committee was not likely to succeed in its bid to compel the Alliance to comply with the Political Reform Act. The court distinguishes this case from Paul for Council v. Hanyecz.
- Graffiti Protective Coatings, Inc. v. City of Pico Rivera
(2010, 2d District – 181 Cal.App.4th 1207, 104 Cal.Rptr.3d 692) - Greco v. Greco
(2016, 3d District – 2 Cal.App.5th 810, 206 Cal.Rptr.3d 501) - Greka Integrated, Inc. v. Lowrey
(2005, 2d District – 133 Cal.App.4th 1572, 35 Cal.Rptr.3d 684) - Greka Integrated, Inc. sued a former employee for breach of contract and conversion. The trial court granted defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion and the appellate court affirmed. The appellate court held that where a party expressly consents to an untimely hearing date, he has thereafter waived his right to object thereto. The court found that defendant’s statements were covered by the anti-SLAPP law because they were made to his counsel, to authorities, in deposition, and in trial testimony. The court also found that Greka presented no evidence that defendant disclosed proprietary or confidential information or that defendant’s possession of the information was wrongful.
- Grenier v. Taylor
(2015, 5th District – 234 Cal.App.4th 471, 183 Cal.Rptr.3d 867) - Grewal v. Jammu
(2011, 1st District – 191 Cal.App.4th 977, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 835) - Gruber v. Gruber
(2020, 2d District – 48 Cal.App.5th 529, 261 Cal.Rptr.3d 819) - Guarino v. County of Siskiyou
(3/1/2018, 3d District – 21 Cal.App.5th 1170, 231 Cal.Rptr.3d 95) - Guessous v. Chrome Hearts, LLC
(2009, 2d District – 179 Cal.App.4th 1177, 102 Cal.Rptr.3d 214)
Print This Page
The information on this website is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. The information here is meant to provide general information to the public.