David J. McMahon

David J. McMahon

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

Contact  |  View Bio  |  RSS

Latest Posts › Anti-SLAPP

Share:

Attorney Fees Are Not Justified To State Bar

In Barry v. The State Bar of California, the California Courts of Appeal for the Second District decided a unique attorney discipline case arising under the SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16(c). The court...more

9/9/2013 - Anti-SLAPP Attorney's Fees Bar Associations Discipline

Anti-SLAPP "protected activities" include filing of unlawful detainer actions

In Trapp v. Naiman, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District decided an interesting real property case. The case began as a non-judicial foreclosure and unlawful detainer matter. The case then morphed...more

8/22/2013 - Abuse of Process Anti-SLAPP Foreclosure Unlawful Detainer

Sanctions Are Issued Where Court Determines That Special Motion To Strike Was Filed For Improper Purpose

In Kleveland v. Siegel & Wolensky LLP, 2013 DAR 4961(2013) the California Courts of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District affirmed the denial of a special motion to strike and the award of costs and attorney fees as...more

5/15/2013 - Anti-SLAPP Motion To Strike Sanctions

Is It Prejudgment Or Postjudgment Interest? The Conclusion Can Make A Difference

In Lucky United Properties Investments Inc. v. Lee, 2013 DAR 1614 (2013), the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District decided when interest begins to accrue on an award of prejudgment interest in the...more

2/20/2013 - Anti-SLAPP Interest Accrual Malicious Prosecution Postjudgment Interest Prejudgment Interest

4 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1