Bander v. Balita Media
Plaintiff and appellant Joel Bander (plaintiff) brought an invasion of privacy action against defendants and respondents Balita Media, Inc. (Balita), Anthony Allen, Luchie Mendoza Allen, and Rhony Laigo (collectively defendants) based upon articles published in defendants’ news publications and/or news Web sites. Defendants responded by filing a special motion to strike the complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16,[1] California’s anti-SLAPP[2] statute. Plaintiff opposed defendants’ motion, arguing, inter alia, that the anti-SLAPP statute does not apply pursuant to section 425.17. The trial court granted defendants’ motion, and plaintiff appeals.
Plaintiff established that, pursuant to section 425.17, subdivision (c), defendants were precluded from bringing an anti-SLAPP motion. The burden then shifted back to defendants to establish that section 425.17 did not apply. Because defendants did not satisfy their burden pursuant to section 425.17, subdivision (d)(2), we reverse.
Comments on Bander v. Balita Media