CA S. Ct. Opinion Re: Nexus Between Challenged Claim And Protected Activity Under Anti-Slapp Statute

Recently, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion analyzing the nexus a defendant must show between a challenged claim and the defendant’s protected activity for the claim to be struck under the anti-SLAPP statute. In Sungho Park v. Board of Trustees of the California State University (May 4, 2017, S229728) __ Cal.5th __, the court held “a claim may be struck only if the speech or petitioning activity itself is the wrong complained of, and not just evidence of liability or a step leading to some different act for which liability is asserted.” (Slip opn., pp. 1-2, original italics.)

The case arose out of the plaintiff professor’s discrimination allegations against the defendant University after being denied tenure. The professor sued the University under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act for national origin discrimination and failure to receive a discrimination free-workplace. (Slip opn., p. 2.) The trial court denied the University’s anti-SLAPP