SLAPP022 – Abuse of Process Claims and Anti-SLAPP Motions

Hooray for Hollywood! In Episode 22 of the California SLAPP Law Podcast, we discuss four cases involving the film industry that have all resulted in anti-SLAPP motions. We also dive deep into abuse of process claims , and determine if such claims can ever survive an anti-SLAPP motion. And in the process, we discuss a trial strategy that I successfully utilized in achieving a case involving the Automotive Repair Act. Cases discussed in this Episode: Kelly Van v. James Cameron (unpublished). In this case, and author named Kelly Van sued James Cameron and a cast of thousands, claiming that Avatar was a ripoff of her book, Sheila the Warrior; the Damned . When she lost the copyright action in Federal Court, she sued in state court, claiming that she only lost the federal action because the defendants had lied. So she was suing for statements made in another case. Sounds like a SLAPP to me. Timothy Forsyth v. Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. In this class action, the plaintiff claims that depictions of smoking in the movies are killing our children. They claim it is a violation of the movie rating system to give a movie a PG-13 rating if the movie depicts smoking (such as Gandalf smoking his pipe in the Lord of the Rings movies). So the plaintiff gets to tell the movie industry how to rate movies? Sounds like a SLAPP to me. Paul Brodeur v. Atlas Entertainment (unpublished). In the 70s, Paul Brodeur told the world that microwave ovens were dangerous, but he never said the cook the nutrients out of food. In the film American Hustle, a fictional charater makes the fictional statement that Paul Brodeur said that microwaves cook the nutrients out of food. So Brodeur gets to tell the movie industry how to write the fictional dialog of its fictional characters? Sounds like a SLAPP to me. Michael Hawkins v. Christian Slater (Superior Court case) For a brief shining moment in Camelot, Christian Slater reunited with his actor father, Michael Hawkins. They had had a turbulent relationship, but Slater announced in an interview that he was happy to have his father back in his life, describing his father as a “manic-depressive schizophrenic.” His father sued for defamation, and Slater brought an anti-SLAPP motion. So Hawkins thinks that Slater is qualified to offer a medical diagnosis, such that his statement would be taken as a verifiable statement? Sounds like a SLAPP to me. Rusheen v. Cohen (Supreme Court Decision). The Supreme Court case that tells all about abuse of process claims. Every abuse of process claim will be met with an anti-SLAPP motion. Here is the information you need to determine if your abuse of process claim will survive that motion. The post SLAPP022 – Abuse of Process Claims and Anti-SLAPP Motions appeared first on California SLAPP Law .

You can listen to SLAPP022 – Abuse of Process Claims and Anti-SLAPP Motions online on Radio and Podcast. Open the player on this page to stream the available audio.

SLAPP022 – Abuse of Process Claims and Anti-SLAPP Motions is an episode from California SLAPP Law by Aaron Morris: Anti-SLAPP Attorney.

This episode is 32:11 long.

This episode was published on Sep 25, 2016.

Yes. Use the heart button on the episode page to add it to your favorite episodes list.

Yes. This page shows related episodes from California SLAPP Law when more episodes are available from the podcast feed.