Park Rolls On

Shahbazian v. City of Ranch Palos Verdes, No. B271562 (D2d7 Nov. 22, 2017)

Some grumpy Palos Verdeans in a fence dispute with their neighbors sued a City for issuing an “over-the-counter after-the-fact permit” that approved the new fence. The City filed an anti-SLAPP motion, which the trial court denied on the basis that issuing a permit is not protected activity under Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(b)(1). The City appealed.

It’s pretty much all Park from here. There, the Supreme Court explained that while governments do and can speak and petition, normal official acts of government are not speech or petitioning, even though they are often arrived at by speaking beforehand and conveyed though some communicative act. Like issuing a permit. So there’s no protected activity.

Affirmed.