Geiser v. Kuhns (2002) 13 Cal.5th 1238. This is a SLAPP case that makes it to the California Supreme Court. The court found that a sidewalk picket protesting a real estate company’s business practices constituted protective activity within the meaning of CCP § 425.16(e)(4). Although the protests stemmed from the personal interest of the residents who were evicted, there could also be a reasonable understanding that public issues of unfair foreclosure and residential displacement practices were at issue. The case was then remanded to the Court of Appeal for further proceedings.
P.I. v. San Bernardino City Unified School District (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 974. There was a shooting in the underlying action on school premises by the estranged husband of a teacher resulting in claims being brought by plaintiffs against the principal and the school district for negligence and dangerous conditions on public property. The school district was granted summary judgment in that the teacher had no reason to foresee her husband’s attack on her at any place and it was not reasonably foreseeable that it would occur on school grounds such that the principal and the school district should have envisioned that it could occur and implement a safety plan as to the spouse’s unaccompanied access to school grounds. Locking the front door would not have affected the risk of harm and did not create a dangerous condition as a result of being unlocked.
ZF Micro Solutions, Inc. v. TAT Capital Partners Ltd (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 992. The successor of a defunct corporation alleged that the defendant had breached a fiduciary duty as a corporate director by disparaging the defunct corporation’s management and undermining its efforts to obtain financing. The court concluded that this claim was a legal one and therefore required a jury trial as a matter of law. The remedy requested was monetary damage exclusively. There was nothing sought by way of equitable relief. While examining the performance of a board member’s fiduciary duties would be required, the resolution of that claim did not implicate powers of equity and it should have been tried as a matter of law.
Manlin v. Milner (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 1004. This is a SLAPP case. In the underlying action, claims were made alleging breach of fiduciary duties by limited liability companies diverting company funds and payment of legal expenses. These claims did not arise from protected activity under the SLAPP statute and to the extent that alleged breach of fiduciary duties consisted of in properly conducting litigation, such conduct was privileged under the litigation privilege.
Gregory L. McCoy