Palmia Master Assn. v. Rufran
Plaintiff Palmia Master Association (the Association) appeals from an order denying its anti SLAPP motion to strike a cross complaint filed by defendant Helene Rufran. The Association contends the cross complaint arose out of its disciplinary hearing against Rufran, which it claims is protected free speech or petitioning activity. While the cross complaint does arise from the disciplinary hearing, the hearing is not protected activity. It does not fall within any of the categories of protected activity specified by the anti SLAPP statute. (Code Civ. Proc., 425.16.) It is not an official proceeding authorized by law and does not involve an issue of public interest. ( 425.16, subd. (e).) Thus, the court correctly denied the motion. Court affirm.
Comments on Palmia Master Assn. v. Rufran