MARLIN v. AIMCO VENEZIA
Where tenants brought action seeking declaration of their rights with regard to possession of rental housing that landlord sought to remove from rental market under Ellis Act, and trial judge ordered that action be stricken under anti SLAPP statute, landlord's subsequent eviction action did not render tenants' appeal of the order striking their declaratory action moot since the court in which the eviction proceeding was filed was not the exclusive forum for the resolution of the issues in dispute. Evidence that plaintiffs did not file declaratory action until after defendant served Ellis Act notices did not establish that plaintiffs' suit was a response to the notices, so trial court erred in ruling that suit implicated defendant's free speech or petition rights for purposes of the anti SLAPP statute. Anti SLAPP motion could not be premised on plaintiffs' prayer for injunctive relief to prevent "defendants from evicting plaintiffs from their residence," which defendants claimed was aimed directly at their right to petition the government for redress through a "judicial proceeding," since anti SLAPP motion must be directed at a cause of action, not a prayer for relief.
Comments on MARLIN v. AIMCO VENEZIA