Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
California Supreme Court· 8/18/2003

Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche

Citations

  • 74 P.3d 737
  • 3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 636
  • 31 Cal. 4th 728
  • 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7433
  • 2003 Daily Journal DAR 9295
  • 2003 Cal. LEXIS 6091

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “The anti-SLAPP statute is not ambiguous with respect to whether its protection of ‘any act’ furthering protected rights encompasses suing for malicious prosecution.”
  • “[Ejvery Court of Appeal that has addressed the question has concluded that malicious prosecution causes of action fall within the purview of the anti-SLAPP statute.”
  • “[E]very [California] Court of Appeal that has addressed the question has concluded that malicious prosecution causes of action fall within the purview of the anti-SLAPP statute.”
  • “[E]very [California] Court of Appeal that has addressed the question has concluded that malicious prosecution causes of action fall within the purview of the anti-SLAPP statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Werdegar

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

222 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. LaMarche

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.