Facts

Jerry Kowal filed a lawsuit against Netflix Inc., Reed Hastings, Ted Sarandos, and Amazon.com Inc.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Kowal alleged that after a year of working for Netflix as a content acquisition executive he left and was hired by Amazon. Kowal further alleged that Netflix publicly claimed that Kowal stole and used Netflix's confidential information when he went to work for Amazon. Kowal also alleged that Netflix blacklisted Kowal and attempted to ruin his reputation at Amazon. Kowal argued that as a result of this conduct his employment at Amazon was terminated after only two months and he was unable to find further employment.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied Kowal's allegations and claimed it was undisputed that Kowal quit his job at Netflix, took Netflix's confidential documents, and then went to work for Amazon. Defendants further contended that they subsequently threatened litigation, and an investigation into Kowal's misconduct. Defendants Netflix, Hastings and Sarandos asserted that all of the allegations against them arose from activity protected by California's anti-SLAPP statute, and that the claims were meritless and protected by the litigation privilege of Civil Code 47.

Amazon argued that Kowal's termination, even as alleged, could not violate public policy or support a civil conspiracy cause.

Result

The court concluded that the claims against defendants Netflix, Hastings and Sarandos were protected by the litigation privilege and barred by the anti-SLAPP statute. The court struck all the claims against defendants Netflix, Hastings and Sarandos. The court then dismissed Kowal's complaint with prejudice, and ordered that Kowal pay defendants Netflix, Hastings and Sarandos attorney fees. The court also ruled that Kowal could not state a wrongful termination in violation of public policy or a civil conspiracy claim against Amazon.