Healy v. Rose
Plaintiff, an attorney appearing in propria persona, appeals from the judgment and the order granting defendant's motion to strike his complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, commonly referred to as the anti SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute. Defendant also appeals from the judgment granting defendant attorney fees.
Appellant raises eight issues on appeal that fall into two categories, those that challenge the order granting the anti-SLAPP motion and those that challenge the judgment and award of attorney fees.
After filing a respondent's brief, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely except as to the order denying appellant's motion to set aside the judgment (Code Civ. Proc., S 473) and the order granting defendant's motion for attorney fees. She argues the former order is frivolous and the later order lacks any analysis or citation of authority. Defendant requests sanctions under California Rules of Court, rule 8.276(e) (hereafter rule) in the amount of $ 9,060.97 to compensate her for her attorney fees and costs and additional sanctions to compensate the court for its costs and time.
Court find the appeal from the order granting the anti-SLAPP motion was not timely filed and shall grant Defendant's motion and dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, Court find Appellant's challenge to the ruling on the demurrer is moot. Last, although there was a timely appeal from the judgment awarding attorney fees, Court find no error in the award. Court therefore affirm the judgment.
Comments on Healy v. Rose