California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Sanderson v. Woodbridge Vill. Ass'n, G056684 (Cal. App. 2020):
If the defendant satisfies the first prong, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish the claim's merit by demonstrating "there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim." ( 425.16, subd. (b)(1).) The plaintiff must demonstrate each cause of action is both legally sufficient and supported by a prima facie showing of facts sufficient to support a favorable judgment if the plaintiff's evidence is credited. (Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 93.) "[T]his second step [i]s a "summary-judgment-like procedure." [Citation.] The court does not weigh evidence or resolve conflicting factual claims. Its inquiry is limited to whether the plaintiff has stated a legally sufficient claim and made a prima facie factual showing sufficient to sustain a favorable judgment. It accepts the plaintiff's evidence as true, and evaluates the defendant's showing only to determine if it defeats the plaintiff's claim as a matter of law. [Citation.] "[C]laims with the requisite minimal merit may proceed."' [Citation.]" (Sweetwater, supra, 6 Cal.5th at p. 940.)
Page 11
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.