Sugarman v. Bennett, No. B307753 (D2d8 Dec. 27, 2021)
Sugarman v. Brown, No. B308318 (D2d8 Dec. 27, 2021)
Two appeals from the same case decide the same issue: statements made in a corporation’s Form 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission are made “in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law,” and thus protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute.
Makes sense.
Affirmed, in relevant part.
Style note: I have complained before about the goofy way California appellate courts explain partial publications, by explaining instead which parts of the opinion are not published. The decisions here do that too. But at least the slip opinion helpfully includes headings that say “[Begin nonpublished portion]” and “[End nonpublished portion].” Readers of slip opinions will take whatever we can get.
No comments:
Post a Comment