SC Manufactured Homes v. Trevillyan
Filed 4/26/06 SC Manufactured Homes v. Trevillyan CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| SC MANUFACTURED HOMES, INC., et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. JONATHAN T. TREVILLYAN, Defendant and Respondent. | B180299 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC311686) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of California, Carl J. West, Judge. Reversed.
The Law Offices of William R. Ramsey, William R. Ramsey for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, Gregory H. Halliday, Guy J. Gorlick for Defendant and Respondent.
_____________________________
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs and appellants SC Manufactured Homes, Inc., and Charles W. Redick, Jr., (collectively Redick) filed this action. It is based on an alleged conspiracy under which mobilehome dealers pay kickbacks to park owners for the exclusive right to sell their mobilehomes in the park, thereby, among other things, precluding competition and increasing the cost of mobilehomes. Defendant and respondent Jonathan Trevillyan, an attorney, allegedly participated in this conspiracy. Trevillyan filed a motion to strike the complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (section 425.16), which the trial court granted. Redick now appeals. We reverse.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
I. The allegations.
A. The original complaint.
Charles W. Redick, Jr., owns and operates SC Manufactured Homes, Inc., a mobilehome dealership. On March 5, 2004, Redick filed a complaint for violation of the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 16720, 16726), intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. All three causes of action were alleged against all 70 named defendants, including Trevillyan. As to Trevillyan specifically, Redick alleged, among other things, that Trevillyan conspired to â€
