Firestone v. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory
In December 2003, John F. Firestone, a landowner, directed his attorney to write a letter to the Temecula City Council, opposing the adoption of a multi-species habitat conservation plan (the habitat plan) affecting his real property. That letter prompted Ocean Atlantic Development,[1]a developer, to file a civil suit against Firestone [the OAD lawsuit]. After the OAD lawsuit was removed to bankruptcy court, the bankruptcy court eventually granted Firestones special motion to strike the OAD lawsuit. (Code Civ. Proc., 425.16.) Firestone then filed a state malicious prosecution action [the Firestone lawsuit], the subject of the present appeal. Because Court decide there was probable cause on the part of the attorney defendants to bring the OAD lawsuit and, therefore, no prima facie case for malicious prosecution against them, we do not need to decide many of the other issues raised on appeal. Court affirm the superior courts order granting the attorney defendants anti SLAPP motions.
Comments on Firestone v. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory