LEGAL MEMOS
Littlefield v. Littlefield (2024) 106 Cal.App.5th 815. This is a SLAPP case. Plaintiff sought injunctive relief to enjoin the Defendants from harassing, disparaging or defaming the Plaintiff and permitting any employees or other agents of a ranch from doing so. Defendant filed a SLAPP motion which the trial court denied concluding that Defendants had failed to satisfy its burden of showing that Plaintiff’s Petition arose from protected activity. The trial court denied the Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees for defending the SLAPP motion concluding the motion was not frivolous nor solely intended to cause unnecessary delay. The Court of Appeal reversed in part and affirmed in part. It affirmed the trial court’s order in its denial of the Defendant’s SLAPP motion, but reversed the order with respect to Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeal found that Defendants did not show that Plaintiff’s Petition or any cause of action asserted in it, was based solely on protected activity, and they did not identify individual allegations or claims that they believe should be struck even if the Petition or entire causes of action were not. The Court then concluded that the SLAPP motion filed by Defendants was frivolous and the Court erred in denying Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees.