“Fourth DCA Reverses Earlier Opinion, Holds Pre-Election Challenges Are Subject to Anti-SLAPP Statute”

Nielsen Merksamer: “Ballot measure opponents have new reason to be cautious about filing pre-election litigation challenging a proposed measure, because the Court of Appeal for the Fourth District recently reversed its own 2007 decision in City of Riverside v. Stansbury, which had held that where a pre-election lawsuit does not limit an initiative proponent’s actions to qualify a measure for the ballot, California’s anti-SLAPP statute (Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16) does not apply.  The new case is Mission Springs Water Dist. v. Verjil, 218 Cal. App. 4th 892 (2013).  It holds that pre-election challenges, regardless of timing or the remedy sought, are subject to an anti-SLAPP motion.”


Comments are closed.