California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Hunter v. Nat'l Basketball Players Ass'n, B254155 (Cal. App. 2015):
Notwithstanding the anti-SLAPP statute must be construed broadly (Martinez v. Metabolife Internat., Inc. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 181, 187), its boundaries are not limitless. "[A] defendant in an ordinary private dispute cannot take advantage of the anti-SLAPP statute simply because the complaint contains some references to speech or petitioning activity by the defendant. [Citation.] . . . [W]hen the allegations referring to arguably protected activity are only incidental to a cause of action based essentially on nonprotected activity, collateral allusions to protected activity should not subject the
Page 10
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.