California Appellate Report describes Wanland v. Mastagni, Holdstedt & Chiurazzi (Cal. Ct. App. - July 6, 2006). But, in this case, the firm defending against the lawsuit just wouldn’t quit, and the system worked by providing damages against a defense firm that acted frivolously. Again. And. Again. Keep readin'.
In short, after two trials (the first goes for the plaintiff, and the second for the defendant), the defendant files a anti-Slapp motion. The defendant loses because it is obvious that this is a matter of which reasonable minds can, and did, differ. The defendant appeals. The defendant forges a signature, and can’t seem to get his sureties in order. He loses the appeal. He litigates the issue of fees. He loses that battle. He appeals the loss on the fees issue. In the end, while the defense won the second trial (a de novo jury trial), he now owes the plaintiff money, not for the actual damages, but for the fees he incurred in the Slapp motion.
But, in the end, the system works. The parties got access to a jury, and a lawyer that used abusive litigation tactics is punished. Hopefully he won’t do it again. Wait. On second thought, I hope he does. This is hilarious.
Comments