Hylton v. Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., No. D053371 - California Case Law
California Case Law - The FindLaw California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal Opinion Summaries Blog

Hylton v. Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., No. D053371

In plaintiff's legal malpractice action against his former attorney seeking damages and rescission of a contingency fee contract, trial court's denial of defendant's anti-SLAPP motion is affirmed as: 1) the trial court correctly ruled that defendant had not met his threshold burden of showing that plaintiff's claims arise from petitioning activity within the purview of the anti-SLAPP statute; and 2) this rendered unnecessary any consideration of defendant's arguments that plaintiff failed to show probable success on the merits. 

Read Hylton v. Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., No. D053371

Filed September 23, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge McDonald

Counsel

For Appellant:  Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., Frank E. Rogozienski; Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek and Gerald L. McMahon

For Appelle:  Stephen M. Hogan; Herron & Steele and Matthew V. Herron