Keystone Freight Corp. v. Bartlett Consolidated, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Keystone’s claim was based on Bartlett’s alleged billing misconduct, not solely the filing of its collection action
• explaining that “attribution of a motive, alone, is never sufficient” to survive an anti-SLAPP motion but “‘evidence of improper action, separate and distinct from the exercise of petitioning activity, is necessary’” (citation omitted)
• “allegations of an ulterior motive unsupported by conduct independent of the petitioning activity are irrelevant to the first stage analysis”
• abuse of process claim was not based solely on special motion proponent's petitioning activity, but also on proponent's fraudulent billing practices prior to commencement of collection action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).