Anti-SLAPP Motion to Strike

SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE

IN THE [____] COURT OF [________________________________]

COUNTY OF [________________________________]

Case No.: [________________________________]

DEFENDANT'S SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO [STATE] ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE

[________________________________]
Plaintiff,

v.

[________________________________]
Defendant.

Hearing Date: [__/__/____]
Hearing Time: [________________________________]
Department: [________________________________]
Judge: Hon. [________________________________]

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant [________________________________] ("Defendant" or "Moving Party") hereby moves this Court for an order striking Plaintiff's Complaint (or specified causes of action) pursuant to [State]'s anti-SLAPP statute, [________________________________].

This motion is made on the grounds that Plaintiff's claims arise from Defendant's exercise of constitutionally protected speech and/or petition rights in connection with a public issue, and Plaintiff cannot demonstrate a probability of prevailing on those claims.

II. PROCEDURAL POSTURE

1. Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action on [__/__/____].

2. Defendant was served with the Complaint on [__/__/____].

3. This motion is timely filed within the statutory deadline:
   - ☐ California: Within 60 days of service of the complaint (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(f))
   - ☐ Texas: Within 60 days of service (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.003(b))
   - ☐ Florida: Within 60 days of service (Fla. Stat. § 768.295(4))
   - ☐ New York: At any time prior to trial
   - ☐ Other state deadline: [________________________________]

4. The causes of action subject to this motion are:
   - ☐ First Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ Second Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ Third Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ The entire Complaint

III. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Background

5. Defendant is:
   - ☐ A journalist/media professional
   - ☐ A private citizen
   - ☐ An organization engaged in public advocacy
   - ☐ Other: [________________________________]

6. The speech at issue in this lawsuit consists of: [________________________________]

7. This speech was made:
   - ☐ In a public forum
   - ☐ In connection with an issue of public interest
   - ☐ In connection with a proceeding before a governmental body
   - ☐ In exercise of petition rights
   - ☐ Other protected context: [________________________________]

B. The Protected Activity

8. On or about [__/__/____], Defendant engaged in the following protected activity:

[________________________________]

9. The context and circumstances of the protected activity were:

[________________________________]

10. The speech/conduct addressed matters of public interest, specifically:

[________________________________]

C. Plaintiff's Claims

11. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges:
    - ☐ Defamation
    - ☐ Libel
    - ☐ Slander
    - ☐ False light invasion of privacy
    - ☐ Intentional infliction of emotional distress
    - ☐ Tortious interference
    - ☐ Other: [________________________________]

12. Plaintiff's claims are based on: [________________________________]

IV. LEGAL ARGUMENT

A. The Anti-SLAPP Statute Applies

13. [State]'s anti-SLAPP statute protects citizens from lawsuits designed to chill the valid exercise of constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition.

14. The statute provides a procedural remedy to dispose of meritless lawsuits at an early stage.

B. Two-Prong Analysis

The Court must engage in a two-step analysis:

Prong One (Defendant's Burden): Defendant must demonstrate that the claims arise from protected activity.

Prong Two (Plaintiff's Burden): If Defendant meets that burden, Plaintiff must demonstrate a probability of prevailing on the claims.

V. PRONG ONE: DEFENDANT'S SPEECH ARISES FROM PROTECTED ACTIVITY

A. Categories of Protected Activity

15. Defendant's speech falls within the following categories of protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute:

☐ Written or Oral Statement Made Before a Legislative, Executive, or Judicial Proceeding
- The statement was made in connection with: [________________________________]
- The proceeding was: [________________________________]

☐ Written or Oral Statement Made in Connection with an Issue Under Consideration by a Legislative, Executive, or Judicial Body
- The issue under consideration was: [________________________________]
- The statement was connected because: [________________________________]

☐ Written or Oral Statement Made in a Place Open to the Public or a Public Forum in Connection with an Issue of Public Interest
- The public forum was: [________________________________]
- The issue of public interest was: [________________________________]

☐ Any Other Conduct in Furtherance of the Exercise of Constitutional Right of Petition or Free Speech in Connection with a Public Issue or Issue of Public Interest
- The conduct consisted of: [________________________________]
- It furthered constitutional rights because: [________________________________]

B. The Speech Concerns a Matter of Public Interest

16. The speech at issue concerns a matter of public interest because:

☐ The statement concerned a person or entity in the public eye
- Specifically: [________________________________]

☐ The statement involved conduct that could directly affect a large number of people
- Specifically: [________________________________]

☐ The statement involved a topic of widespread public interest
- Specifically: [________________________________]

☐ The statement contributed to a public debate on an issue
- Specifically: [________________________________]

☐ Other basis for public interest: [________________________________]

C. The Claims Arise from the Protected Activity

17. Plaintiff's claims directly arise from Defendant's protected speech because:

[________________________________]

18. The gravamen of Plaintiff's claims is Defendant's exercise of free speech rights.

19. But for Defendant's protected speech, Plaintiff would have no basis for the claims asserted.

VI. PRONG TWO: PLAINTIFF CANNOT DEMONSTRATE A PROBABILITY OF PREVAILING

A. Legal Standard

20. Once Defendant meets the first prong, the burden shifts to Plaintiff to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on the claim by presenting admissible evidence.

21. Plaintiff must demonstrate that the complaint is both legally sufficient and supported by a sufficient prima facie showing of facts to sustain a favorable judgment.

B. Plaintiff's Claims Fail as a Matter of Law

22. Plaintiff cannot prevail because:

☐ Truth Defense
- The statements at issue are substantially true
- The truth is: [________________________________]

☐ Opinion Defense
- The statements are constitutionally protected opinion, not statements of fact
- The statements cannot be verified as true or false because: [________________________________]
- The context indicates opinion because: [________________________________]

☐ Privilege Defense
- The statements are protected by [absolute/qualified] privilege
- The privilege applies because: [________________________________]

☐ Fair Report Privilege
- The statements are a fair and accurate report of official proceedings
- The proceeding reported was: [________________________________]

☐ Public Figure/Actual Malice
- Plaintiff is a public figure who must prove actual malice
- Plaintiff cannot prove actual malice because: [________________________________]

☐ No Publication
- The statements were not published to third parties

☐ Not "Of and Concerning" Plaintiff
- The statements do not identify or concern Plaintiff

☐ Statute of Limitations
- The claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations
- The statement was published on [__/__/____]
- The limitations period is [____] year(s)
- The Complaint was filed on [__/__/____]

☐ Other Defense: [________________________________]

C. Plaintiff Lacks Admissible Evidence

23. Plaintiff cannot make the required evidentiary showing because:

[________________________________]

VII. AUTOMATIC STAY OF DISCOVERY

24. Upon the filing of this motion, discovery is automatically stayed pending resolution of the motion, except:
    - ☐ California: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(g)
    - ☐ Texas: Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.003(c)
    - ☐ Other state provision: [________________________________]

25. Any discovery sought by Plaintiff should be denied unless Plaintiff demonstrates good cause by showing that specified discovery is necessary to oppose this motion.

VIII. MANDATORY ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS

26. Under the anti-SLAPP statute, a prevailing defendant is entitled to recover attorney's fees and costs:
    - ☐ California: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c)(1)
    - ☐ Texas: Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.009(a)(1)
    - ☐ Florida: Fla. Stat. § 768.295(4)
    - ☐ New York: N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 70-a
    - ☐ Other: [________________________________]

27. Defendant will file a motion for attorney's fees and costs upon prevailing on this motion.

IX. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. Grant this Special Motion to Strike;

2. Dismiss and strike the following claims from Plaintiff's Complaint:
   - ☐ First Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ Second Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ Third Cause of Action: [________________________________]
   - ☐ The entire Complaint

3. Enter judgment in favor of Defendant on the stricken claims;

4. Award Defendant reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to [statute];

5. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
[________________________________]
Attorney for Defendant

Bar Number: [________________________________]
Firm Name: [________________________________]
Address: [________________________________]
City, State, ZIP: [________________________________]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

(To be filed concurrently with or incorporated into this motion)

[________________________________]

DECLARATION OF [________________________________]

I, [________________________________], declare as follows:

1. I am the Defendant in the above-entitled action. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein and could and would competently testify thereto if called as a witness.

2. [Factual statements supporting the motion]

3. [________________________________]

4. [________________________________]

5. [________________________________]

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of [State] that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on [__/__/____] at [________________________________].

_________________________________
Declarant Signature

PROOF OF SERVICE

(Attach proof of service on all parties)

STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES

California (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16)

• File within 60 days of service of complaint
• Court may extend for good cause
• Discovery automatically stayed
• Mandatory attorney's fees to prevailing defendant
• Immediate right to appeal denial

Texas (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.001 et seq.)

• Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA)
• File within 60 days of service
• Hearing within 60 days of service of motion
• Discovery stayed pending ruling
• Mandatory fees, costs, and sanctions

Florida (Fla. Stat. § 768.295)

• Applies to free speech in connection with public issues
• File within 60 days
• Expedited hearing required
• Attorney's fees to prevailing defendant

New York (N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 76-a)

• Applies to "actions involving public petition and participation"
• No specific filing deadline
• Costs and attorney's fees to prevailing movant

UPEPA States

• Ohio, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Montana, Iowa, Delaware, Idaho (eff. 1/1/26), and others
• Uniform procedural framework
• Expedited disposition

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Anti-SLAPP Report Card 2025 - Institute for Free Speech
• Anti-SLAPP Legal Guide - Reporters Committee
• State Anti-SLAPP Laws - Public Participation Project