Caliber Paving Company, Inc. v. Rexford Industrial Realty & Management, Inc.(2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 175.
A subcontractor sued a general contractor for breach of contract and also sued the owner of the property for intentional interference with the contract after the subcontractor was released after a scheduling dispute. After the owner was dismissed by the trial court, the court of appeal reversed and sent the case back to the trial court with instructions that a party who is not a party to a contract is not immune from liability for intentional interference with the contract because that party does have an economic or social interest in the contract. Here the subcontractor had raised a triable issue as to whether the owner had interfered with the contract because allegedly the owner’s representative had directed the general contractor to kick the subcontractor off the job and hire somebody else. Although this was double hearsay, it was admissible because the statement of the owner was a statement of a party opponent and the statement of the property owner’s representative was inconsistent with the declaration he provided.
Marshall v. Webster (2020) 54 Cal.App.275. This was a defamation case and a SLAPP motion. The motion was granted as filed by the defendant and the plaintiff thereafter appealed, but the court found that the appeal was untimely because it was not filed until more than 60 days after the date when the order granting the motion was filed and the clerk served a signed, file-endorsed copy of the ruling. The appeal deadline was not extended by plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration because the anti-SLAPP order was a judgment from which no valid judgment for reconsideration could lie.
Gregory L. McCoy