|
P1085 Evidence that defendants protesting alleged cruelty to animals went to the homes of the corporate plaintiff's employees where they broke windows, vandalized cars, set off ear-piercing alarms, left excrement on doorsteps, and committed similar acts conclusively established that their activities were illegal as a matter of law, and therefore not protected by the SLAPP statute; since a preliminary injunction issued against such conduct does not affect the merits of the claim, it does not violate the rule that appeal from a SLAPP decision stays all proceedings in the trial court.CitationNOVARTIS v STOP HUNTINGDON ANIMAL CRUELTY (Animalistic Activists) 143 CA4 1284 [See: Huntingdon Life Sciences v Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty 129 CA4 1228, T/AT 7/05; Flatley v Mauro 39 C4 299, P/AT 9/06; Varian v Delfino 35 C4 180, P/AT 5/05]
|
|
