May 6, 2020

Patel v. Chavez (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 484

Plaintiffs filed a complaint against defendant, a former employee, alleging defendant violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by testifying falsely against plaintiffs at a labor hearing. Defendant filed a motion to strike plaintiffs’ complaint, based on the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16). The trial court granted the motion.

On appeal, plaintiffs argued the anti-SLAPP statute does not apply to federal causes of action. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that the anti-SLAPP statute applies to federal claims when those claims are brought in state court.

In applying the anti-SLAPP statute to a federal claim, the Court of Appeal relied on the established principle that federal claims brought in state court are governed by state rules of evidence and procedure “unless application of those rules would affect plaintiffs’ substantive federal rights.” The court held that the anti-SLAPP statute does not affect a plaintiff’s substantive rights under federal law because it “applies neutrally to all types of causes of actions and does not . . . target government conduct.”