Bellville v. Wagner
Filed 6/30/06 Bellville v. Wagner CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| JOHN S. BELVILLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELLIOTT WAGNER et al., Defendants and Appellants. | G035987 (Super. Ct. No. 04CC10015) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Corey S. Cramin, Judge. Affirmed.
Stephan, Oringher, Richman & Theodora, Arthur R. Chenen, Robert M. Dato and Brian P. Barrow for Defendants and Appellants.
Law Offices of George B. Piggott and George B. Piggott for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
Defendants Elliot Wagner, M.D. and Sheldon Zide, M.D., appeal from an order denying their special motion under California's anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16; (section 425.16)) to strike plaintiff John S. Belville's complaint for various breaches of written contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious inducement of breach of contract. Defendants contend they made a prima facie showing that their actions fell within the definition of protected activity under the statute, and the trial court erred in failing to then shift the burden of proof to plaintiff to prove a probability of success on the merits. We find no error and affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff is a cardiovascular and interventional radiologist. In 1991, he became an employee of Digital and Radiologic Imaging Associates (DRIA), which at all relevant times was the exclusive provider of imaging services for Mission Regional Medical Center (hospital). Four years later, he became a shareholder of DRIA pursuant to a written agreement. Defendants were and still are DRIA's managing officers and directors.
At some point, plaintiff got behind in dictating reports for hundreds of his cases. Eventually, DRIA stopped paying him and did not schedule him for procedures.
Plaintiff sued DRIA, Wagner, and Zide, asserting causes of action for various breaches of the employment agreement, including claims for unpaid compensation and purchase of his shares in DRIA. In a cause of action against all defendants entitled â€
