legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert T. Hafif
These appeals were consolidated in the Supreme Court. They are before court on remand from that court. Plaintiff, Peggy J. Soukup, sued defendants, the Law Offices of Herbert Hafif, Herbert Hafif, Cynthia D. Hafif, Greg K. Hafif, and Ronald Stock. The trial court denied defendants special motions to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, and court reversed. The Supreme Court granted review, reversed the judgment of this court, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with court's opinion. (Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif (2006) 39 Cal.4th 260, 298.) The remittitur states, Costs, if any, shall be awarded by the Court of Appeal. The parties have not filed any supplemental briefs as permitted by California Rules of Court rule 8.200(b). This matter has now been submitted. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.256(d)(2).) Consistent with the Supreme Courts opinion in Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif, supra, 39 Cal.4th at pages 278 298, court affirm the orders denying defendants Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 special motions to strike. Plaintiff, Peggy J. Soukup, is to recover her costs on appeal, jointly and severally, from defendants, the Law Offices of Herbert Hafif, Herbert Hafif, Cynthia D. Hafif, Greg K. Hafif, and Ronald C. Stock.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale