Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate seeking to invalidate a new contract between defendant-city and its competitor and to compel city to award the contract through competitive bidding, trial court's grant of defendant's anti-SLAPP motion is reversed and remanded as, even if plaintiff's claims involve a public issue, they are not based on any statement, writing, or conduct by the city in furtherance of its right of free speech or its right to petition the government for the redress of grievances. Rather, plaintiff's claims are based on state and municipal laws requiring the city to award certain contracts through competitive bidding, and thus, the claims are not subject to the anti-SLAPP statute.
Filed February 5, 2010
Opinion by Judge Mallano