“The Legislature has authorized a special motion to strike that may be filed against “SLAPP” suits [Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation]. The anti-SLAPP motion is a procedural remedy, designed to quickly identify and dispose of lawsuits brought to chill the valid exercise of a party’s constitutional right of petition or free speech. Courts use a two-step process for determining whether an action or a claim is a SLAPP suit subject to a special motion to strike. Plaintiff’s claim must (1) arise out of defendant’s protected speech or petitioning; and (2) lack even minimal merit. Commonly, the court first determines whether plaintiff’s claims arise out of protected activity—i.e., whether the claim against defendant is predicated on defendant’s exercise of a constitutional right of free speech or petition. It is defendant’s burden to show the claim arises out of protected activity. If that burden is not met, the motion will be denied. If defendant meets the first prong burden, the burden shifts to plaintiff to show the probability that plaintiff will succeed on the merits of the claim. In other words, even if the conduct for which defendant is being sued implicates defendant’s free speech or petition rights, the lawsuit may proceed if plaintiff makes a prima facie showing that the claim has merit.
Any ‘person’ [defendant or cross-defendant] sued for acts in furtherance of free speech or petition activities is protected. The anti-SLAPP motion must be filed within 60 days after service of the complaint or amended complaint. Thereafter, a motion may be permitted in the court’s discretion ‘upon terms it deems proper.'”
[California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial [citations to primary sources omitted]]
