Rueda v. Pacquiao CA2/5
Khan Law Office, Amman A. Khan; Benedon & Serlin, Gerald M. Serlin and Wendy S. Albers, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
The parties in this case effectively agree they were involved in “settlement” communications to resolve a dispute. The issue is whether those communications constituted prelitigation settlement communications protected by Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute. That question in large part reduces, on the facts here, to whether an attorney for one side in the dispute who seeks to resolve it by (among other things) demanding a legal release for his clients could make such a demand even while believing the other party was not seriously contemplating litigation.
Comments on Rueda v. Pacquiao CA2/5