legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Pickart v. Ben-Shahar
Plaintiff and appellant Stephanie Pickart filed a complaint against defendant and respondent Adi Ben-Shahar (Shahar), alleging causes of action for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress stemming from his alleged failure to vacate a rental property in accordance with a local ordinance. The trial court granted Shahar’s special motion to strike the complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute.[1] It ruled the complaint involved protected activity because Shahar’s conduct in failing to vacate the property was related to a pending unlawful detainer action, and appellant failed to establish a probability of prevailing.
We reverse. Guided by Clark v. Mazgani (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th 1281, 1284 (Clark), “[w]e conclude [appellant’s] claims did not arise from a protected activity—they are based on [Shahar’s] violation of rent control laws, not on actions in furtherance of the right of free speech or petition.”

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
    © 2026 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2026 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale