legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Glavinovich v. Davis
This is one of a number of appeals from judgments after orders granting defense motions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16,[1] the anti-SLAPP statute,[2] in a malicious prosecution action by plaintiff John L. Glavinovich. All of the anti-SLAPP motions relate to the same underlying case, Sweidan v. Orange County Physicians Investment Network, LLC (Super. Ct. Orange County, 2013, No. 30-2009-00122142).
In this case, Glavinovich appeals the trial court’s decision to grant three anti-SLAPP motions filed by 1) Vincent W. Davis and the Law Offices of Vincent W. Davis & Associates (collectively Davis); 2) Jacob Sweidan, and 3) Ajay Meka, Yong Chun, Jamie Ludmit, Ashok Amin, Bharat Chauhan, Suringder Dang, Joginder Jodhka, Sandamitra Kothapa, Anthony Lee, Robert Melikian, Ahmed Salem, Praful Sarode, Grace Sein, and Patrick Walsh (collectively, with Sweidan, the OCPIN plaintiffs). Based on the minimal and nonspecific evidence produced by Glavinovich in the trial court, he has not demonstrated that he can establish a lack of probable cause or malice, two of the three requirements to maintain a cause of action for malicious prosecution. We therefore affirm the trial court’s decision to grant the anti-SLAPP motion.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale