|
P0898 An insurer that was not named as defendant in an action against the Insurance Commissioner seeking to enjoin enforcement of an amendment to the Insurance Code, but that intervened in the action, lacked standing to make an anti-SLAPP motion; in addition, because the action so clearly did not arise from any exercise of constitutional right by the insurer and because it so clearly fell within the statutory exception for public interest lawsuits, the insurer could not reasonably have believed its motion to have merit; so the trial court was justified in awarding attorney fees to the plaintiffs who successfully resisted the insurer's SLAPP motion.CitationFOUNDATION FOR TAXPAYER RTS v GARAMENDI (Prop 103 Amendment) 132 CA4 1375 [See: CCP 425.16, 425.17; Decker v UD Registry 105 CA4 1382, P/AT 3/03]
|
|
