JUDITH CHAMBERS v. KIM MILLER
Filed 6/20/06
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| JUDITH CHAMBERS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KIM MILLER et al., Defendants and Appellants. | G035400 (Super. Ct. No. 04CC11189) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Charles Margines, Judge. Affirmed.
Christopher L. Blank for Defendants and Appellants.
Eadington, Merhab & Eadington, Margot M. Nelson, David A. Sprowl and KD Hughes for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
Defendants Kim Miller and Julie Scharnell appeal an order denying their special motion to strike brought under the anti-SLAPP statute.[1] (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16.)[2] They contend the trial court erred by ruling it could not award attorney fees under the statute because defendants filed their special motion to strike after plaintiff Judith Chambers dismissed her claims against them. Chambers contends the dismissal deprived the trial court of jurisdiction to grant attorney fees under the statute.
Because we conclude the trial court properly denied fees under the anti-SLAPP statute, we do not reach the jurisdiction issue. Section 425.16, subdivision (c), provides that â€
