Facts

Plaintiff CFC and defendants Heritage Provider Network, Inc.; Regal Medical Group, Inc.; Sierra Medical Group, Inc.; and Lakeside Medical Organization, a Medical Group, Inc. (collectively, "Heritage") are competitors in the Medi-Cal line of business in the managed care industry. in Los Angeles County. Multiple lawsuits arose between the parties, including an antitrust suit filed in federal court by Heritage against CFC. When it became clear that discovery and legal issues in the antitrust case would overlap those in the other litigation between the parties, the parties negotiated an agreement whereby Heritage agreed to dismiss the antitrust case with prejudice in exchange for CFC's agreement to waive costs and attorneys' fees and that the dismissal would not have res judicata or collateral estoppel effect in the other actions. Less than three months after the federal court dismissed the antitrust case based on the parties' stipulation, CFC filed a malicious prosecution complaint against the four Heritage entities and their counsel in the antitrust case, Michael Amir and Doll Amir & Eley, LLP.

All defendants filed a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute, CCP 425.16. Defendants presented evidence that CFC could not satisfy any element of malicious prosecution: the antitrust action was not pursued to a legal termination in CFC's favor; the antitrust case was brought with probable cause; defendants had no malice when filing and pursuing the antitrust action; and CFC suffered no damages.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: CFC contended that despite the stipulation, the antitrust action should be viewed as a favorable determination for CFC; there was no probable cause for the underlying suit; defendants acted with malice when they filed the antitrust action; and CFC suffered damages in the form of attorneys' fees to defend the antitrust action and loss of reputation.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended that due to the stipulation, there was no outcome on the merits in the antitrust action favorable to CFC, the action was filed with probable cause following a year-long review and analysis by an antitrust expert, the antitrust action was filed without malice towards CFC, and CFC waived any possible damages as part of the stipulation to dismiss.

Settlement Discussions

Defendants proposed dismissal in exchange for waiver of costs before filing the anti-SLAPP motion. CFC rejected the proposal and made no counter.

Damages

$200,000 plus hundreds of man-hours plus harm to reputation.

Result

The court concluded that CFC could not satisfy any element of malicious prosecution, granted defendants' anti-SLAPP motion to strike, and awarded $116,000 in attorneys' fees.