Just the Facts, Official Reporter...

Sonoma Media Inv., LLC v. Superior Court, No. A151968 (D1d5 Apr. 8, 2019)

A city council Candidate sued the local Newspaper for libel over some articles regarding the way his campaign was funded. The trial court granted an anti-SLAPP motion over most of the claims, but permitted discovery into the Newspaper’s malice on others. The Court of Appeal reverses the denial. Candidate failed to made a prima facie showing that the statements were false—a necessary step to show a likelihood of success that must be accomplished without the benefit of discovery. 

The decision was originally unpublished. But now, for good cause, the panel decides to publish, “with the exception of Parts II and III.” Problem is, Parts II and III contain the totality of the Court’s analysis. All that’s left is a recounting of the facts and procedural posture, along with a few boilerplate paragraphs in Part I regarding the standard applicable to anti-SLAPP motions. 

I am, to say the least, somewhat confused.

Reversed.

***Update. Looks like the Court just figured this out. Whole opinion ordered published.

A Demand for Everything Is Apparently Not an Offer of Compromise

Arave v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., No E061677 (D4d2, as modified, Jan. 23, 2018)

First things first. A footnote at the beginning of this 95-page opinion says “We certify this opinion for publication under California Rules of Court, rules 8.1105(b) and 8.1110, except for parts I.B., I.C., I.D., I.E., I.F., I.G., II.A.1., II.A.2., II.A.4., II.A.5., II.A.6., II.B., II.C., II.D., II.E., II.F., and II.I.” (On a publication request the court struck II.C from the footnote.) So to figure out what is actually being published, you’ll need to make a list (like literally write it down) then scroll through the opinion and figure out by process of elimination what’s not excluded.

Down the Ol’ Memory Hole

So published court of appeal opinions are permanently available because they are, well, published. And unpublished opinions have a Westlaw database where they can be looked up, even if they can’t be cited. But how do you find the unpublished parts of partially published opinions? I can’t seem to find them on Westlaw, and after the slip opinions disappear from the first page of the listing on the courts’ website—which, e.g., for the Second District goes back about two years—they appear lost from the public record unless someone wants to send a runner to pull them from the file. 

Am I missing something?