Attig v. Graffam
After prevailing in a lawsuit brought against her by Jocer Enterprises, Inc., Laura Attig filed an action for malicious prosecution against Jocer Enterprises and its owners, Spencer Graffam and Jodi Graffam (collectively defendants). Defendants filed a motion under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute (Code Civ. Proc., 425.16). The trial court denied the motion and found that Attig established a reasonable probability of prevailing on the merits.
In challenging the trial courts decision, defendants claim that the court erred in finding that Attig provided sufficient evidence to support her allegations against the individual defendants. Defendants also claim that the court erred in finding that Attig presented evidence to establish that defendants acted with malice in initiating and maintaining the underlying action. Defendants specifically argue that the court erroneously relied on its prior decision granting Attigs motion for attorneys fees based on Castlebrooks bad faith as conclusive proof of malice both for purposes of defeating defendants anti SLAPP motion and for purposes of trial. Defendants also object to the trial courts award of attorneys fees. For the reasons discussed below, Court affirm the trial courts ruling denying defendants anti SLAPP motion, but reverse the ruling awarding Attig attorneys fees.
Comments on Attig v. Graffam