Smith v. Hance
Appellants appeal from an order issuing an injunction against harassment under Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 in favor of respondent Danny Hance, which in part prohibits the Smiths from "photograph[ing] or videotap[ing] Hance's home, driveway, garage, yard or vehicles." The Smiths contend: (1) section 527.6 does not apply to their actions in photographing Hance's vehicles and surrounding areas because their photograph taking is communicative and thus constitutionally protected; (2) the restraining order is not a reasonable time, place and manner restriction; (3) their photograph-taking activities are protected by the Civil Code section 47 litigation privilege as preparatory to constitutionally protected petition activity; (4) there is insufficient evidence of a "course of conduct" as to Steven Smith because there is no evidence he acted in concert with Gregory Smith; and (5) the trial court erred in denying Gregory's Smith's request to strike Hance's petition under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, commonly known as the "anti-SLAPP" (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute. Court reject these contentions and affirm the order.
Comments on Smith v. Hance