Plaintiff v. Lawyers
Sedgwick obtained a favorable appellate ruling on behalf of our attorney clients in an anti-SLAPP case heard in the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District. In the underlying action, our clients represented a shareholder of a closely held company who sued another closely held corporation and one of its officers for allegedly wrongfully diverting certain assets. After the trial court sustained the officer and corporation’s demurrers to the shareholder’s second amended complaint without leave to amend, they sued our clients and the shareholder for malicious prosecution. Sedgwick represented the attorneys in the malicious prosecution action and filed an anti-SLAPP motion that argued the corporation and officer plaintiffs could not establish that our clients maintained the underlying action without probable cause and that the plaintiffs had no evidence that our clients acted with malice. The trial court agreed and granted the anti-SLAPP motion. The corporation and its officer appealed, and Sedgwick represented our clients on the appeal. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting the anti-SLAPP motion.