Gwire v. Blumberg
Plaintiff and attorney William Gwire sued his former clients, defendants Elliot Blumberg, Vigilant Investors’ L.P., and Vigilant Investors’ Asset Management LLC (collectively defendants) after Blumberg, an unhappy former client, posted disparaging comments about Gwire on complaintsboard.com, a web site providing a forum for the public to comment on and complain about consumer issues (complaintsboard.com or the web site).
The trial court granted defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16)[1] as to four causes of action in the operative complaint, but denied the motion as to Gwire’s two defamation claims. The court concluded Gwire established a probability of prevailing on his defamation claims because Blumberg’s statement that Gwire committed a “horrific fraud†against Blumberg that “irreparably damaged every aspect of [Blumberg’s] life†was a false statement of fact, not opinion.
Blumberg appeals. We affirm. We conclude Blumberg’s comments on complaintsboard.com, a consumer complaint web site, are protected under section 425.16, subdivision (e)(3): they are written statements made in a “public forum in connection with an issue of public interest[.]†We also conclude, however, that Gwire established a probability of prevailing on the merits of his defamation claims because Blumberg’s post, in part, is susceptible to being read as containing false factual assertions. Gwire submitted sufficient evidence to satisfy his minimal burden to show a probability of prevailing on at least some aspect of his defamation claims.
Comments on Gwire v. Blumberg