Cambridge v. Holland
The trial court denied the motion on grounds that, “although defendant Holland has met his burden of showing that the causes of action arise, in part, out of his protected speech, [p]laintiff [and respondent] Cambridge has met his burden of showing that he has a probability of prevailing based on his showing that Holland made defamatory and unprivileged statements to Ms. Beckman and Mr. Duffey accusing plaintiff of a crime.†(Underscore omitted.)
Comments on Cambridge v. Holland