|
4979 Defendants’ alleged actions of engaging in a conflict of interest was not protected by the anti-SLAPP statute. The continuation of joint representation, their legal strategy, and implementing non-communicative conduct, and their alleged failures to act are not statements or writings within the meaning of the anti-SLAPP statute. Furthermore, there was no showing that any of defendants’ allegedly wrongful conduct, not consisting of statements or writing, occurred “in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.”
CitationPREDIWAVE CORP v SIMPSON THATCHER & BARTLETT (Malpractice SLAPP) 179 CA4 1204 [See CCP §425.16]
|
|
