Dacanay v. Beckman
Defendant appeals an order denying his request for attorney fees and costs under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., 425.16) following the dismissal by plaintiffs and respondents Felix Dacanay (Dacanay) and Golden Budha Corporation (Golden Budha) of their action against him.
The essential issue presented is whether the cause of action by Dacanay and Golden Budha against Beckmann for breach of fiduciary duty arose from any acts by Beckmann in furtherance of his right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitutions. ( 425.16, subd. (b)(1).)
Court conclude, as did the trial court, that the cause of action against Beckmann for breach of fiduciary duty was not based on, and did not arise from, protected activity as defined by the statute. Therefore, Beckmann would not have prevailed on his anti-SLAPP motion had the action not been voluntarily dismissed. Accordingly, the trial court properly denied Beckmanns motion for attorney fees and costs. The order is affirmed.
Comments on Dacanay v. Beckman