What is the standard of review for a hospital?

such a case the standard of review would be highly favorable to the hospital. (See Fahlen, supra, 58 Cal.4th at p. 673, 168 Cal.Rptr.3d 165, 318 P.3d 833.) But this case arrives here by way of an anti-SLAPP motionsans evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we resolve conflicts and inferences in the record in favor of the plaintiff. (Barker v. Fox & Associates (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 333, 347348, 192 Cal.Rptr.3d 511.)

Here, the peer review process was not completed. If there is a spin to our statement of facts, it is because we must credit the plaintiff's evidence in opposition to the anti-SLAPP motion where it conflicts with that of the defendants. In such motions, "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." (See Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.4th 376, 385, 205 Cal.Rptr.3d 475, 376 P.3d 604 (Baral ).)