How have courts interpreted language in the anti-SLAPP statute?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Mcgraw-Hill Cos., 176 Cal.Rptr.3d 496, 228 Cal.App.4th 1382 (Cal. App. 2014):

Because this case requires us to interpret language from two subdivisions of the anti-SLAPP statute, we are particularly guided by the rule requiring us to consider portions of a statute in the context of the entire statute and the statutory scheme of which it is a part, giving significance to every word, phrase, sentence, and part of an act in pursuance of the

[228 Cal.App.4th 1389]

legislative purpose. (Curle v. Superior Court (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1057, 1063, 103 Cal.Rptr.2d 751, 16 P.3d 166.)

Applying these rules leads to several conclusions.

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

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.

Other Questions

How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)

How have courts interpreted italicized language in the statute of limitations where a plaintiff has filed a claim in a different court? (California, United States of America)

When a section of the California Civil Code provides for construction of a statute, how do courts interpret the construction of the statute? (California, United States of America)

How have the courts interpreted the language of the majority opinion in a motion that reverses the trial court's judgment that proxies cannot be used in the election of directors? (California, United States of America)

If a statutory language does not yield a plain meaning, and the legislative history of the legislation is not to be considered in determining the meaning of the statute, can a court rely on the statute itself? (California, United States of America)

How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a statute by officials charged with its administration? (California, United States of America)

When an agency adopts a new interpretation of a statute and rejects an old interpretation of the statute? (California, United States of America)

Does the rule against interpreting statutory language "in a manner that would render some part of the statute surplusage" support a different interpretation? (California, United States of America)

Does section 125.3 of the California Code of Civil Procedure apply to the construction of the statute, and if so, does the court have jurisdiction to interpret the interpretation of the law? (California, United States of America)

Is section 1001.36 of the California Criminal Code a "stressed interpretation" of the law and, if so, would it be impertinent for the court to place a strained interpretation upon the statute? (California, United States of America)

How have courts interpreted language in the anti-SLAPP statute?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources