Confusion abounds among litigants as to whether and when the anti-SLAPP may apply in a given case. A common mistake is to assume that the statute does not apply in bankruptcy court. However, there is long-standing authority in the Ninth Circuit for the application of California’s anti-SLAPP law in federal court so long as the claims are pendant state law claims and do not involve federal claims for relief. See, United States ex rel Newsham v. Lockheed Missiles & Space (9th Cir. 1999) 190 F.3d 963; Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Center for Medical Progress (9th Cir. 2018) 890 F.3d 828, amended (9th Cir. 2018) 897 F.3d 1224; Restaino v. Bah (In re Bah), 321 B.R. 41, 46 (9th Cir. BAP 2005); see also Globetrotter Software, Inc. v. Elan Comput. Grp., Inc., 63 F. Supp. 2d 1127, 1129-30 (N.D. Cal. 1999). In In re Bah, the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, in finding that the appellant appropriately sought relief under California’s anti-SLAPP statute in bankruptcy court, reasoned that because the debtor “invoked state law remedies in bankruptcy court which he could have (but did not) raised in state court . . . [n]o reason exists to deny Appellants a state law remedy which they could have asserted against Debtor’s state law claims in state court.” 321 B.R. at 46. Therefore, if Debtor’s claims for relief arise out of California state law, they may be subject to California’s anti-SLAPP statute. See In Keenan v. Pyle (In re Keenan), 2008 WL 878913 (Dist.Ct. Cal. Mar. 28, 2008).
Leave a Reply