Hardy v. Elliott
Filed 6/29/06 Hardy v. Elliott CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
CELESTINE HARDY,
Plaintiff and Respondent, A112264
v. (Alameda County
Super. Ct. No. RG04-178023)
DOROTHY ELLIOTT et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
______________________________________/
Dorothy Elliott and her attorney Richard L. Ferguson appeal from an order denying their motions under the SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16)[1] to strike a malicious prosecution action that had been filed against them. We agree respondent Celestine Hardy failed to present evidence sufficient to establish a prima facie case and will reverse the order denying the motions to strike.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In this appeal, we address one aspect of what has become a bitter and convoluted family dispute.
Charlie Hardy, Sr., married Carry Boughton in 1931. They had four children: Essie Henry, Charlie Hardy, Jr., appellant Dorothy Elliott, and John Hardy.
Carry Boughton died in 1938. Charlie Hardy, Sr., married Minnie Hardy a year later.
Charlie Hardy, Sr., and his wife Minnie prospered financially. They purchased a home and some commercial property in Oakland. The latter asset was located near the corner of 20th and Castro Streets and was held by Charlie Hardy, Sr., and Minnie as joint tenants.
Charlie Hardy, Sr., died in 1970. By operation of law, title to the commercial property passed to his wife Minnie. In 1989, Minnie gift-deeded title to the commercial property to her son Charlie Hardy, Jr. Minnie Hardy died in 1990.
Charlie Hardy, Jr., died in May 2001. In April 2002, his wife, respondent Celestine Hardy, filed a spousal property petition alleging that all of her husband's property passed to her under the terms of a will he executed in April 1998.
In July 2002, appellant Elliott filed a petition to administer her brother's estate alleging he had died intestate.
In August 2002, appellant Elliott filed a petition asking that a special administrator be appointed to open and inspect any safe deposit boxes that her brother Charlie may have controlled. The petition alleged there was a â€
