California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Monterrosa v. Elimelech, B278380, c/w B279713 (Cal. App. 2018):
Our Supreme Court clarified recently: "The first step of the anti-SLAPP analysis is limited to whether a claim arises from protected activity. We made it clear in Flatley [,supra, 39 Cal.4th 299] that conduct must be illegal as a matter of law to defeat a defendant's showing of protected activity. The defendant must concede the point, or the evidence conclusively demonstrate it, for a claim of illegality to defeat an anti-SLAPP motion at the first step." (City of Montebello v. Vasquez (2016) 1 Cal.5th 409, 424.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.