Attorney Patrick J. D’Arcy has argued successfully before the Court of Appeal three times, and has defeated every appeal of that anti-SLAPP motion. While this is not a guarantee that you will get the same or even better results, the firm’s track history on defamation law is highly impressive.
One common misperception about defamation law is that it is just a simple matter of whether was is said is true or not. That generality – if it guides your entire thinking on defamation law – will get you screwed (royally) every time. Before even thinking of that defense, you must “fit” the law (e.g., Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16) and facts into the anti-SLAPP grinder and its two step approach. Under the first step, a trial court decides whether what you said is protected speech. If “yes,” then the trial court does a second step analysis to see if the plaintiff has enough evidence and facts to support its claim, based upon “minimal merit.” The plaintiff’s claim must show only “minimal merit” on the second prong analysis to defeat your anti-SLAPP. Worse for a defendant, if the plaintiff and the defendant’s evidence are in conflict, the plaintiff defeats the anti-SLAPP again. If the statements could go either way, then the plaintiff still wins, and the defendant is forced to have the matter decided at trial. This is a fancy way of saying that you are now headed for years of litigation. Whether or not something is “true” rarely even gets decided at this phase. Why? Because the court, as a matter of procedure, does not weigh the credibility of witnesses. So, you, as a defendant, could argue (even scream) that something you said is true, but it will fall on deaf ears for quite a long time.
Lawyers that take defamation cases as a hobby quickly get blitzed by those who practice this area of law for a living. Anti-SLAPP law is constantly changing, and is an intricate series of laws and cases that are in constant tension with each other, and then there are defenses to what was said that can blow your whole case out of the water. One appellate brief I wrote had over 70 cited cases. The boundaries of speech, and what is considered “protected” speech, constantly evolve. I have gone up against a divorce lawyer “moonlighting” on a defamation case, and she got her ass kicked. After nearly five years of cases, I am always learning nuances to this tricky area of the law. Even judges mention how they are reviewing anti-SLAPP decisions trying to figure out whether or not a case can proceed.
If you sue someone based on what they said or wrote, there are “defenses” that can get the anti-SLAPP granted, the dismissal of the case, and the payment of their attorney’s fees. For instance, perhaps what was said was part of a legal proceeding. There are privileges that attach to things said during litigation, but no protection for other things being said (the so-called Silberg factors).
I sued over fake reviews posted about me, and then defeated both anti-SLAPP motions, and on April 24, 2020, the Appellate Court unanimously defeated the anti-SLAPP motion again, and even found that no anti-SLAPP protection existed. I briefed and argued the matter before the Court of Appeal. One defendant has appealed (again) to the California Supreme Court. The matter is pending.
In another defamation case, I was brought in to handle two appeals of anti-SLAPP motions. I wrote major portions of the appellate briefs. The Appellate Court found for my client on all counts, reversed the trial court and its awarding of attorney’s fees, and reversed the dismissal of the causes of action. The Appellate Court found that there was no anti-SLAPP protection at all.
I brought a defamation action for a CEO, and the defendant responded with an anti-SLAPP motion. I defeated the anti-SLAPP motion. The defendant hired an “appellate specialist,” and appealed the trial court’s ruling. I drafted the appeal and argued the matter before the Court of Appeal, and they unanimously agreed with me and defeated the appeal.
In a defamation action in one family member against the other, I defeated the anti-SLAPP motion, and then drafted the appellate brief. After seeing that they were going to lose their appeal, they abandoned their appeal in exchange for written assurance we would not come after them for attorney’s fees and costs.
In a defamation action where I represent business owners and an investment house, I wrote to the person that drafted the fake Yelp review, and requested (in a several page letter) that she delete the review to avoid litigation. Instead, we were told to “Fuck off!” (As an advocate of free speech, “Fuck Off!” is brilliant for its simplicity and directness while not being defamatory). We filed the lawsuit, and then defeated her application to file a late anti-SLAPP, and also eliminated some of her cross-claims in the process. Case still continuing.
I represented an employee at a boutique jewelry store of one of the world’s most famous jewelers. The employee was defamed and branded dishonest in front of the other employees, sent home on Christmas day, and placed on indefinite suspension by a narcissistic moron for a manager. I then sued the jeweler after they refused to reinstate my client and refused to hear what actually happened. I proved that the manager was completely wrong in her actions. The manager was fired, the employee was reinstated, and a large settlement was reached.
I have beaten some of the top defamation lawyers in this state. Your reputation is one of your most precious commodities. Do not let people fuck with it. Give me a call. I will bring the litigation heat. If you have been sued for defamation, I will provide you with a very high-end defense. You have only one year to sue for defamation, and the statute of limitations does not restart just because it was re-published. The lone exception is if the defamation is buried in some periodical (like it was in a university research library), so that it could not have been noticed with any reasonable diligence.
