Gulsvig v. Philipson & Simon
The law firm of Philipson and Simon (Philipson) appeals from the denial of its special motion to strike Lori Gulsvigs second amended cross-complaint as a strategic lawsuit against public participation or SLAPP suit. Philipson argues Gulsvigs second amended complaint, which alleges that Philipson breached its fiduciary duty of loyalty to her its former client when it encouraged a third party to challenge her entitlement to the proceeds of the very case in which Philipson had been representing her (allegedly for the purpose of gaining an advantage in its own fee dispute with Gulsvig), necessarily arises out of petitioning activity as defined by the anti-SLAPP law. Court disagree, and thus need not address Philipsons contention that Gulsvig also failed to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on her claim.
A clients claim against her attorney for breach of loyalty does not necessarily arise out of petitioning activity for purposes of the anti-SLAPP law, just because the breach results in the initiation of additional litigation. The claim arises out of the disloyalty itself, which is wrongful without regard to whether it results in further litigation. And such litigation, if it occurs, is merely a consequence rather than the gravamen of that breach.
The order is affirmed.
Comments on Gulsvig v. Philipson & Simon