Filed 2/21/20 Certified for Publication 3/16/20 (order attached) COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITIZENS OF HUMANITY, LLC, D074790 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2018-00006337- CU-NP-CTL) CONI HASS et al., Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kenneth J. Medel, Judge. Affirmed. The Spangler Firm and Arie L. Spangler for Defendant and Appellant Coni Hass. Pettit Kohn Ingrassia Lutz & Dolin, Douglas A. Pettit, and Jocelyn D. Hannah for Defendants and Appellants John H. Donboli, JL Sean Slattery, and Del Mar Law Group LLP. Browne George Ross, Peter W. Ross, and Charles Avrith for Plaintiff and Respondent. 1 John H. Donboli, JL Sean Slattery, and Del Mar Law Group LLP (collectively the Del Mar Attorneys) filed a mislabeling lawsuit on behalf of a putative class of consumers who claimed they were misled by "Made in the U.S.A." labels on designer jeans manufactured by Citizens of Humanity (Citizens). Citizens's jeans were allegedly made with imported fabrics and other components. The linchpin of the purported class action was that the "Made in the U.S.A." labels violated former Business and Professions Code section 17533.7.1 However, a new law was passed after the complaint was filed that relaxed the previous restrictions and, ultimately, the lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. (Stats. 2015, ch. 238, ยง 1.) Citizens then filed this malicious prosecution action against the named plaintiff in the prior case (Coni Hass), a predecessor plaintiff (Louise Clark), and the Del Mar Attorneys. Each defendant filed a motion to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. Finding that Citizens met its burden to establish a probability of prevailing on the merits, the trial court denied defendants' motions. Hass and the Del Mar Attorneys (together Appellants) appeal contending Citizens failed to make a prima facie showing that it would prevail on its claims. We disagree. As we shall explain, (1) there are no undisputed fact on which we can determine, as a matter of law, whether the Del Mar Attorneys and Clark had probable cause to pursue the 1 Statutory references are to the Business and Professions Code unless otherwise specified. 2 underlying actions; (2) there is evidence which would support a reasonable inference the Appellants were pursuing the litigation against Citizens with an improper purpose; and (3) the district court's dismissal of the underlying action, with prejudice, constituted a favorable termination in the context of a malicious prosecution suit. Accordingly, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Underlying Litigation In June 2014, the Del Mar Attorneys initiated a putative class action lawsuit against Citizens in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging the company misleadingly labeled that its jeans were "Made in the U.S.A." when they used imported components (fabric, thread, buttons, zipper assembly). The putative class consisted of "all persons in the United States" who bought apparel from Citizens that was labeled "Made in ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals