Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Citation
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Parent Document
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2020-10-21
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4799030/reyes-v-kruger/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (35)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
Full Text
634 chars7Appellants argued in a motion for supplemental briefing that given the “trap for the unwary” created by the direct appealability of an order granting a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute (see Russell, supra, 160 Cal.App.4th at p. 664 (conc. opn. of Rubin, J.)), this court should permit supplemental briefing to challenge the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial, which was encompassed in the appeal from the January 23 judgment and raised the same issues as the appeal from the anti-SLAPP order. We granted appellants’ request to file supplemental briefing regarding issues raised in the motion for new trial.