Date: 10-12-2001

Case Style: Simmons v. Allstate Insurance Company

Case Number: C034619

Judge: Nicholson

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third Appellate District

Plaintiff's Attorney: Unknown

Defendant's Attorney: Unknown

Description: California’s anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16 [all further unspecified statutory references are to this code]) allows dismissal, at an early stage, of a lawsuit designed primarily to chill the exercise of First Amendment rights.1 It permits a special motion to strike any cause of action designed to deter acts in furtherance of a person’s right of petition or free speech. (§ 425.16, subd. (b).)

In this case, Lester A. Simmons, Ute Simmons, and related business entities appeal from an order striking, as a SLAPP suit, a defamation-based cross-complaint they filed against Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) in response to an unfair business practice suit by Allstate charging the Simmons defendants with bilking insurance companies and overtreating patients.

Seeking reversal, the Simmons defendants contend that Allstate never carried its burden of showing that the crosscomplaint fell within the statutory definition; alternatively, if some of the allegations did fall into the SLAPP category, they claim the trial court erred in refusing to grant leave to amend the pleading to eliminate the offending verbiage.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: We conclude the trial court correctly struck the crosscomplaint and did not err in refusing leave to amend. We shall affirm and award Allstate attorney fees in connection with defending the appeal.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: None