Rudisill v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n, No. B289179 (D2d2 Jun. 5, 2019)
Real party in interest permit applicants in this administrative mandamus case against the Coastal Commission got sanctioned for filing a frivolous anti-SLAPP motion. The trial court thought that a writ of mandate challenging official government actions is per se not subject to an anti-SLAPP motion, so the motion was frivolous. But based on the way the writ was plead, Plaintiffs arguably also went after the real parties for the way they applied for their CCC permit. That could at least be the subject of an arguable anti-SLAPP motion, so the motion wasn’t so frivolous as to merit sanctions. And since the real parties didn’t appeal the merits of the motion, the Court doesn’t need to decide more than that.
Reversed.
Real party in interest permit applicants in this administrative mandamus case against the Coastal Commission got sanctioned for filing a frivolous anti-SLAPP motion. The trial court thought that a writ of mandate challenging official government actions is per se not subject to an anti-SLAPP motion, so the motion was frivolous. But based on the way the writ was plead, Plaintiffs arguably also went after the real parties for the way they applied for their CCC permit. That could at least be the subject of an arguable anti-SLAPP motion, so the motion wasn’t so frivolous as to merit sanctions. And since the real parties didn’t appeal the merits of the motion, the Court doesn’t need to decide more than that.
Reversed.