Developer Shy's Suit Against Homeowner Thrown Out on Anti-SLAPP Grounds
Eric Richardson
[Flickr]
Defendant Jessica Jordan is a homeowner in SB Grand, a building developed by Barry Shy.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Developer Barry Shy's attempt to clear his name via the courts was dealt a major blow this week as Superior Court Judge Yvette M. Palazuelos granted an anti-SLAPP motion filed by attorneys for Jessica Jordan, a homeowner in the Shy-developed SB Grand.
The ruling strikes the complaints Shy had filed against Jordan and leaves the developer responsible for the defendant's legal fees and court costs.
A SLAPP suit, or "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation," is a suit intended to punish someone for engaging in free speech. California has particularly tough laws against SLAPP suits, providing mechanisms for defendants to get a judge to quickly rule on the potential merits of the case.
Shy's suit against Jordan alleged defamation and loss of business as a result of items published on Jordan's website, truedowntown.com.
Palazuelos' ruling determined that the case against Jordan met both of the criteria to be struck down under California's Anti-SLAPP laws. First, the court ruled that "all three causes of action alleged in the complaint 'arise from' [Jordan's] exercise of free speech about a public issue in a place open to the public." Palazuelos then ruled that Shy did not provide provide sufficient evidence that the case had merit and could be successful.
Jordan was represented by Jamey Leonard of the non-profit First Ammendment Project. Asked for a statement on the decision, Leonard emailed this to blogdowntown:
The First Amendment Project was proud to defend Jessica Jordan's exercise of free speech, and she has our heartfelt congratulations. Judge Palazuelos' ruling should serve as a reminder to all Californians that they cannot be silenced by even the most powerful of opponents. Free Speech is the cornerstone of our democratic society, and while it is up to our courts to protect this right, the true burden is on our citizens to bravely speak their minds, no matter who stands against them.
Jordan is currently out of the country doing film work, but emailed blogdowntown this morning to provide information on the ruling.
MendocinoFarms
FIDM
lacitabar
jloungela
LA_LIVE
SpringStreetBBQ
browne on September 26, 2008, at 03:56PM – #1
I thought this would be a popular topic, so late request. Is there a bar where people will be watching the debates in downtown.
And to get back on topic, I am really looking forward to going back to their website if it's still up. I know it will be especially entertaining now.
Ginny on September 27, 2008, at 10:34PM – #2
Browne:
No - I am pretty sure this is the building located close to Pershing Square.
They used to have a Rite Aid on their ground floor. But, so did Santee Court.
Whassup with that? Hey, someone put a Trader Joes in one of those spots.
Naturallawyer on September 27, 2008, at 11:00PM – #3
I discussed the lawsuit with a colleague at my firm shortly after I read about it on this blog a few weeks ago. Both he and I discussed "anti-SLAPP" immediately. This case was tailor-made for the anti-SLAPP laws. Kudos to the attorneys defending the case.
nanorich on September 28, 2008, at 07:05AM – #4
Well, it is nice to know that Barry owes money to yet another entity...
and will probably continue to owe it for the duration.
In the meantime, check your watches...the Shy Shills will show up anytime now to abuse Shy critics and attempt to bully them with tales of how great it is to be an owner of Shy developed property...
um. sorry... on September 28, 2008, at 06:16PM – #5
In case you wonder if the truth stings, a while ago I had friends that lived in a Shy building, and I saw a unit there that I liked. Really liked... I spoke with a few people that knew Shy up close. A year ago I closed on my home at the Pan Am (not a Shy building...) I am very, very happy here. Last I heard, the unit I liked has yet to sell. Karma happens, Barry.
Don Garza on September 29, 2008, at 12:57AM – #6
As always the 1st amendment prevails. Good Job guys!!!
JM on September 29, 2008, at 01:02PM – #7
Congratulations, Jessica. Well done, Mr. Leonard. There's definitely more of a community growing Downtown these days; people not only care about what happens to their neighbors, they're engaged in the issues. There's a valuable lesson to be learned in this case. Congratulations to the First Amendment Project! It's nice to know there are organizations like yours watching out for our community.
Tim on September 30, 2008, at 01:41PM – #8
This is great news!
Ankur on October 01, 2008, at 10:56AM – #9
Long live the power of the public accessible and google crawable forums!
Buyer's remorse... on October 09, 2008, at 09:06PM – #10
Congratulations Jessica! Well done. You've taken one for the team and our entire building benefits from your efforts. Bravo to the attorneys that represented your First Ammendment rights as well.
Barry: Now would probably be a good time to make amends to your tenants who still have outstanding grievances with you after all these years. And don't get so caught up in the "slander" allegations, the shoddy craftsmanship of the 312 West 5th Street building and your refusal to concede HOA power to your tenants speaks for itself. In fact, you just may be your own worst enemy. If its your reputation you're worried about, start by hiring a therapist for your issues, an interior designer for your public spaces, and a property management firm to develop your struggling communities. The "slander" will fade in direct proportion to your personal involvement in the properties you have overhauled. Its a no-brainer: either change your modus operandi or lay low. Rocket-science? Hardly.
Oh, and please... don't slap grey paint on any more of the gorgeous marble buildings in downtown. Your interiors are bad enough, why subject the unwitting public to your design misgivings by destroying the exteriors as well. Bad taste is no excuse for bad manners as well.
-comparisons on July 01, 2009, at 12:44AM – #11
Does anyone have an update on the issues at SB grand?
To my knowledge The higgins community were able to overthrow the shy barry dictatorship...
are the circumstances different at the SB grand? If similar what is now need to ensure homeowners rights aren't exploited. How long can this process take?