Court Denies Anti-SLAPP Motion in Connecticut Trial Firm Dissolution Case

Law360 reported this week that a Connecticut Superior Court judge has rejected an anti-SLAPP motion filed by attorney Andrew Garza and his firm, Claggett Sykes & Garza LLC, in McKeen Law LLC et al. v. Claggett Sykes & Garza LLC et al. Hurwitz Sagarin & Slossberg represents Ryan and Allison McKeen and McKeen Law LLC, whose complaint alleges unfair trade practices following the dissolution of Connecticut Trial Firm.

In the ruling, a judge held that the defendants had not shown that the McKeens’ claims arise from protected speech on a matter of public concern. The complaint centers on alleged private communications, including altered out-of-office emails and statements to employees and prospective clients, and the court found these were not made in a public forum. The court also found that online reviews tied to the firm’s Google business profile were not a matter of public concern.

“Defendant’s effort to invoke the anti-SLAPP statute in a private, unfair trade practices case was an obvious abuse of the statute,” said David A. Slossberg, who represents the McKeens along with Julie V. Pinette. “The court agreed, finding that defendants could not even establish probable cause for the motion. While the statute is a well-intended safeguard of protected free speech, it is too often, as here, filed merely for delay. We are glad the court rejected defendant’s shenanigans and look forward to expeditiously addressing the merits of our unfair trade practices claim.”

Read the full Law360 article here.