"SLAPP" is an acronym for "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation". It is a type of lawsuit that is filed in order to silence, intimidate or otherwise punish someone for speaking out against the plaintiff. These lawsuits are often frivolous and without merit, but they can be very costly and time-consuming to defend against.
SLAPPs are a serious threat to free speech and open government. They can stifle public debate and chill participation in civic affairs. They also diverge scarce resources away from more important cases.
There are a number of ways to fight back against SLAPPs. Some jurisdictions have laws that protect against them. You can also file a motion to dismiss the case or file a counterclaim.
If you are the victim of a SLAPP, it is important to seek legal assistance as soon as possible.
What are SLAPP cases?
A SLAPP case is a lawsuit that is filed with the intent to silence, intimidate or otherwise punish an individual or organization for exercising their right to free speech. These lawsuits are often frivolous and without merit, but can be costly and time-consuming to defend against. In some cases, the targets of SLAPP lawsuits may be forced to give up their right to free speech in order to avoid the expense and hassle of litigation.
SLAPP stands for "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation." These lawsuits are often brought by corporations or other powerful interests in an attempt to stifle criticism or dissent. They are usually filed in response to some form of public participation, such as protesting, writing letters to the editor, or testifying before a governmental body.
SLAPP lawsuits are a serious threat to free speech rights, and many states have enacted laws to protect against them. However, these laws are not always effective, and SLAPP lawsuits continue to be filed.
What is the purpose of anti-SLAPP law?
Anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) laws are designed to protect individuals from being sued in retaliation for exercising their right to free speech. These laws vary from state to state, but typically provide for early dismissal of meritless lawsuits, as well as reimbursement of attorney's fees and costs.
The goal of anti-SLAPP laws is to discourage frivolous lawsuits that are intended to silence critics and chill public participation. These laws help ensure that people can freely express their opinions without fear of retribution.
Which states have SLAPP laws?
There are a number of states in the US that have what are known as "SLAPP" laws. These laws are designed to protect people from being sued for speaking out against someone or something. They are typically used in cases where someone has made a public statement that is critical of another person or organization, and the person or organization being criticized then sues the speaker for defamation.
The following states have SLAPP laws: California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.
What is a slap statue?
A slap statue is a statue that is designed to be hit or slapped by passersby. The statue typically has a sign or plaque attached to it that reads something like "Hit me!" or "Slap me!" in order to encourage people to interact with it.
Slap statues are often used as marketing gimmicks or as a way to generate donations for a cause. For example, a company might place a slap statue in front of its store in order to generate attention and foot traffic. Or, a charity might place a slap statue in a public place with a sign that asks for donations to the charity.
Hit Me
What is a SLAPP suit in California?
A SLAPP suit is a lawsuit filed in an attempt to silence, intimidate, or otherwise retaliate against an individual or entity for exercising their right to free speech. SLAPP stands for "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation."
In California, SLAPP suits are governed by the Anti-SLAPP statute, which was enacted in 1992 in response to an uptick in such lawsuits. The statute is designed to protect individuals and entities from meritless lawsuits that are intended to stifle free speech.
Under the statute, a defendant can file a special motion to strike a SLAPP suit within 60 days of being served with the complaint. If the motion is granted, the suit is dismissed and the plaintiff is required to pay the defendant's attorneys' fees and costs.
The statute also provides for a limited exception to the general rule that a plaintiff must pay the defendant's attorneys' fees and costs. If the court finds that the defendant filed their special motion to strike in bad faith, the court may order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's attorneys' fees and costs.
The Anti-SLAPP statute has been interpreted by the courts to apply to a wide range of activities, including political speech, petitioning the government, and filing a complaint with a government agency.