| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published | 
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 
 A142646 
 | 
Contreras v. Dowling
 Attorney representing landlords prevails on anti-SLAPP motion in case brought by tenant alleging attorney aided and abetted wrongful conduct.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Oct. 27, 2016 | |
| 
 B264511 
 | 
Suarez v. Trigg Laboratories
 One party's concealment, during settlement talks, of information that would have benefitted the other party's negotiating position falls within anti-SLAPP statute.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Sep. 7, 2016 | |
| 
 C078369 
 | 
Greco v. Greco
 Motion to strike properly denied where sister's claims alleging brother's wrongful taking from parents' trust and estates is not protected activity under anti-SLAPP law.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 23, 2016 | |
| 
 B265690 
 | 
Cruz v. City of Culver City et al.
 Public interest exception does not defeat anti-SLAPP motion in case alleging city council's violation of Brown Act open meeting law.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 10, 2016 | |
| 
 S219052 
 | 
City of Montebello v. Vasquez
 Votes case in councilmembers in city council meeting qualify for protection under anti-SLAPP statute.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 9, 2016 | |
| 
 B269087 
 | 
Doe 2 v. Superior Court (Avongard Products U.S.A. Ltd.)
 Writer of anonymous emails wins petition for writ of mandate directing court to vacate order granting libel plaintiff's motion to discover writer's identity.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 4, 2016 | |
| 
 14-55539 
 | 
Travelers Casualty Insurance Co. of America v. Hirsh
 Denial of anti-SLAPP appealable and proper here where insurer's complaint did not arise from counsel's litigation-related conduct, but rather from his post-settlement conduct.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 4, 2016 | |
| 
 S225090 
 | 
Baral v. Schnitt
 Anti-SLAPP motion applies to 'mixed' causes of action containing allegations of both protected and unprotected activity.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 2, 2016 | |
| 
 C074796 
 | 
Nam v. Regents of the University of California
 Anti-SLAPP motion does not apply to harassment, discrimination suit as underlying claim is not about institution's protected activity, i.e., filing written complaints about plaintiff.  | 
Anti-SLAPP | 
 | 
Aug. 1, 2016 | 
