Kenne v. Stennis
Annotate this CaseDefendant and his wife appealed from the trial court's order denying, in part, their anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, special motion to strike claims against them. The claims arose out of the wife's police reports and her filing of two civil harassment petitions under section 527.6 against plaintiff. Plaintiff cross-appealed the trial court's order granting, in part, defendants' special motion to strike. The court held that the trial court erred when it denied the special motion to strike as to the conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress causes of action; the conduct underlying those causes of action is protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute and plaintiff cannot prevail on the merits where her malicious prosecution claim cannot be based on the filing of a petition under section 527.6 and the conduct underlying plaintiff's other tort claims is privileged under Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b). On cross-appeal, the court held that the trial court did not err in granting the special motion to strike as to the abuse of process, libel, and slander causes of action because those claims arose from protected activity, and plaintiff cannot prevail on them as a matter of law as they are barred by the litigation privilege in Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.