Creger v. Hudson 141 HOA
Bradford D. Creger (plaintiff) bought a condominium that, unbeknownst to him, had construction and legal defects. When those defects came to light, plaintiff and the other condo owners in the same complex filed suit and entered into two sets of settlements. Unsatisfied with these settlements, plaintiff sued many of the entities and lawyers involved in the earlier litigation. These defendants moved to dismiss many of plaintiff’s claims under the “anti-SLAPP”[1] statute. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 425.16.)[2] The trial court partly granted and partly denied those motions, and awarded attorney’s fees to the defendants on those motions. Plaintiff now appeals some (but not all) of the grants and the fee awards. Except as to one claim, we conclude that the trial court’s rulings were correct and affirm.
Comments on Creger v. Hudson 141 HOA