![]() In Tender Care, the individual defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion was denied for failure to establish that the statements addressed “matters of public interest or a public issue.” Defendants had argued that their statements qualify for anti-SLAPP protection because they conveyed important consumer information about the quality of veterinary services in a small, rural community, which they argued is a significant public issue or issue of public interest. In making its determination, the court will consider the pleadings and supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based. Such motions will be granted unless the plaintiff establishes a “reasonable likelihood” of success on the claim, in which case the matter proceeds as normal. Defendants must file the special motion within 63 days after service of the complaint unless a later filing date is deemed proper by the court, and a hearing will typically be scheduled within 28 days after service of the special motion. ![]() Colorado’s anti-SLAPP law allows defendants to file a “special motion to dismiss” based on the right of free speech or petition in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest. Like California’s statute before it, Colorado’s version is intended to protect the right to free speech and petition, and to prohibit the filing of non-meritorious lawsuits merely aimed to silence critics. While California has had a SLAPP statute in place for quite some time, Colorado only recently enacted an anti-SLAPP statute in 2019, section 13-20-1101, C.R.S. “SLAPP” stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. The clinic had filed suit for defamation per se, and the individual posting about her experience filed a special motion to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP law. A client of a veterinary clinic had posted six online reviews on her personal Facebook page, the company’s Facebook page, and four different community-based Facebook pages, asserting that the veterinary clinic engaged in “malpractice,” and employs “incompetent” and “dishonest” doctors and staff. Barnett tested the limits of Colorado’s anti-SLAPP law in considering whether an individual’s online review of a company could invoke the protections of the anti-SLAPP law. On November 30, 2023, the Colorado Court of Appeals in Tender Care v. Littler Inclusion, Equity and Diversity Playbook.Littler Investigation Toolkit for Employers. ![]() We’re ready for your tomorrow – because we’re built for it.Global Workplace Transformation Initiative.General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |