Time to Appeal Appealable Order Runs from Minute Order

Marshall v. Webster, No. C088240 (D3 Aug. 27, 2020)

An order granting an anti-SLAPP motion is appealable under Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(i). Like other appealable orders, the order is appealable when made--there doesn’t need to be some further formalization before the right to appeal is ripe. So Rule of Court 8.104’s 60-day clock to file a notice of appeal starts to run when the clerk mails the order. 

Here, the trial court granted the motion in a minute order, which was promptly served on the parties by the clerk. Then the defendant submitted a proposed order granting the motion, which the court ultimately signed about six weeks later. But as the Court of Appeal explains, the clock started from the first ruling. The court unequivocally granted the motion in the first order, which made it appealable. There was no need for further proceedings or a more formal order by the trial court. Which means this appeal was filed too late.

Appeal dismissed.

The Joys of § 425.16(i)

Cent. Valley Hospitalists v. Dignity Health, No. A148742 (D1d2 Jan. 9, 2018)

The complaint in this case was crappy. So crappy it wouldn’t hold up to a demurrer. Practically the only thing it was specific about was that it disclaimed being directed at any anti-SLAPP-worthy activity. But defendant filed both a demurrer and an anti-SLAPP motion anyway. The demurrer was granted, with leave. But the trial court denied the anti-SLAPP without prejudice, expressly stating that Defendant could bring a new anti-SLAPP against a better fleshed out complaint, if merited. Defendant, however, didn’t wait to SLAPP the new complaint. Instead, it took an appeal, as it could as a matter of right.

The Court of Appeal isn’t pleased. Defendant managed to waste 22 months with a stupid appeal of an anti-SLAPP motion it could have more meaningfully directed to a better complaint. Moreover, the complaint here, crappy as it was, did not state claims that arose from protected conduct. It indeed disclaimed that it did. So this appeal was a worthless waste of time. But the Court here declines to award any monetary sanctions and finds it sufficient to browbeat Defendant, mostly because Plaintiff didn’t really ask for them.

Affirmed.