GERBOSI v. GAIMS, WEIL, WEST & EPSTEIN, LLP









Filed 3/9/11





CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

MICHAEL GERBOSI et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. GAIMS, WEIL, WEST & EPSTEIN, LLP et al., Defendants and Appellants.

B219587 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BC388812 & BC388664)

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
Peter D. Lichtman, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Proskauer Rose, Bert H. Deixler, Travis P. Brennan; Kendall Brill & Kriegler and Bert H. Deixler for Defendants and Appellants.

Johnson & Johnson, Neville L. Johnson, Douglas L. Johnson and Lan P. Vu for Plaintiffs and Respondents.


____________________________


This appeal arises from two of many lawsuits seeking damages allegedly caused by the activities of private investigator Anthony Pellicano and others. Michael Gerbosi has filed a complaint against Pellicano and Gaims, Weil, West & Epstein, LLP (Gaims),[1] a law firm that allegedly accepted the fruits of Pellicano's activities. Erin Finn has also filed a complaint against Gaims. This appeal follows protracted proceedings on separate anti-SLAPP motions filed by Gaims to strike Gerbosi's and Finn's complaints. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16.)[2] The trial court issued an order denying both motions, leaving Gerbosi's and Finn's complaints to proceed unabated against Gaims. Later, the court entered an order jointly awarding attorneys' fees to Gerbosi and Finn in an amount of roughly $220,000.
Gaims appealed and we affirm the trial court's rulings on Gaims's anti-SLAPP motion to strike Gerbosi's complaint. All of Gerbosi's causes of action against the law firm may proceed, and Gerbosi may recover attorneys' fees incurred in opposing the anti-SLAPP motion. We affirm in part the trial court's rulings on Gaims's anti-SLAPP motion to strike Finn's complaint. Her causes of action alleging unlawful wiretapping-related claims may proceed, but her causes of action alleging that Gaims engaged in wrongful acts in the course of underlying litigation must be stricken. As a result, the attorneys' fees in favor of Finn must be denied.
FACTS
Background
A long time ago, Finn dated Robert Pfeifer, a former executive at Sony Records, Hollywood Records, and Z-Axis, Ltd., a video game developer. According to Pfeifer, he ended their relationship in 2000 upon learning that Finn operated an internet prostitution service. At about the same time that Pfeifer and Finn were parting, Z-Axis fired Pfeifer for the stated reason that he was using illegal drugs. Pfeifer then sued Z-Axis for wrongful termination. During the summer of 2000, Finn testified at a deposition in Pfeifer's wrongful termination case, stating that she had seen him using illegal drugs. Pfeifer and his lawyers then hired Pellicano to â€