Rosen v. Singh
In a prior litigation, plaintiff and appellant Robin Rosen filed a personal injury action against the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) and its bus driver, claiming she suffered a debilitating stroke a month after the MTA bus rear-ended the school bus in which she was traveling.[1] Plaintiff retained expert biomechanical and medical witnesses—defendants and respondents in the instant action, Jai Singh and Franklin Moser, M.D.—to help prove liability and damages. The MTA and bus driver, however, prevailed when the jury specially found they were not negligent in the underlying accident. In the instant action, plaintiff sued experts Singh and Dr. Moser, alleging they conspired with the MTA’s counsel in the personal injury action to sabotage her case by giving detrimental testimony, thereby violating their fiduciary and contractual obligations to plaintiff.
Singh and Dr. Moser brought anti-SLAPP[2] motions under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 to dismiss the action on the ground that all the claims against them were premised on their testimony in the personal injury action, which was an exercise of constitutional rights of petition and free speech. The trial court granted the motions, finding plaintiff’s causes of action arose out of protected speech and plaintiff failed to carry her burden of showing a probability of prevailing on the merits of her claims.[3] In her timely appeal, plaintiff contends the trial court erred in granting the anti-SLAPP motion. We affirm.
Comments on Rosen v. Singh