• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Contact
  • Reviews

California Defamation Law Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • Blogs
  • Archive Page
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Services
  • Contact Us
  • (626) 793-8607
You are here: Home / Adrianos M. Facchetti / Google Search Results Can Be Used to Show Public Interest Under Prong One of the SLAPP Statute

Google Search Results Can Be Used to Show Public Interest Under Prong One of the SLAPP Statute

March 8, 2012 by Adrianos Facchetti 1 Comment

Under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, a defendant must meet its threshold burden to show that plaintiff’s cause of action arises from protected activity. One of the ways to do this is to demonstrate that the protected activity involves a matter of public interest, generally speaking. In cases involving alleged defamatory consumer reviews, one of the challenges a defendant must meet is to show that the issue is of interest to a significant number of people–not merely a private dispute involving parochial matters. One way to do this is to perform a Google search of the purported public issue involved. For example, if you do a Google search for "Lakers" it returns about 102,000,000 results. So obviously, this is a matter of great interest. I have done this in several cases and it has proven to be very effective. In fact, recently, in a published anti-SLAPP decision, the Court of Appeal relied upon such evidence in determining whether the disputed matter involved a public issue. In short: Google search results can be used to show a matter of public interest.

If you liked this post, please subscribe to receive free updates by e-mail or RSS.

Buffer Share

Filed Under: Adrianos M. Facchetti, Anti-SLAPP, Los Angeles anti-SLAPP motion lawyer Tagged With: "Adrianos M. Facchetti" "Los Angeles anti-SLAPP motion lawyer"

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Darren Chaker says

    December 26, 2016 at 10:34 am

    Without a doubt, very good point to raise to meet that prong of anti-SLAPP. Keep up the good work in pointing out these issues.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Darren Chaker Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Some Featured

How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion

Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Recent Posts

Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law?

Does California’s anti-SLAPP statute apply in bankruptcy court?

Must attorney-client confidences be revealed in order to obtain attorney’s fees after a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Follow Us On

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Search

Footer

California Defamation Law Blog

Law Offices of Adrianos Facchetti 4444 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 308, Burbank, CA 91505
California Defamation Lawyer & Attorney of Adrianos Facchetti Law Firm, offering services related to libel, internet defamation, slander, defamation of character, disparagement, anti-SLAPP, personal injury, car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, serving Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Arcadia, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino, and throughout California.

Recent Posts

  • How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion July 18, 2022
  • Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 28, 2022
  • May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 24, 2022
  • Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law? June 20, 2022

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in