Fisher Investments v. Casper
Fisher Investments, Inc., and Kenneth Fisher (collectively and singular Fisher Investments, unless the context indicates otherwise) appeal from orders denying their motion to compel arbitration and their special motion to strike a complaint filed by Thomas Casper.[1] Fisher Investments argues the trial court erroneously denied the motion to compel arbitration because it did not waive its right to arbitrate. It also contends the court erroneously denied its special motion to strike because the challenged causes of action arise from protected activity, Casper did not demonstrate a probability of prevailing on those causes of action, and the challenged statements are protected by the litigation privilege. As we explain below, we conclude the court properly denied Fisher Investments motion to compel arbitration, and the court properly denied the special motion to strike one of the causes of action, but erroneously denied the motion as to other causes of action.
We affirm the trial courts order denying Fisher Investments motion to compel arbitration. Court affirm that part of the courts order denying Fisher Investments special motion to strike Caspers second cause of action, and reverse that part of the courts order denying the special motion to strike the first, seventh, eighth, and ninth causes of action.
Comments on Fisher Investments v. Casper