Davoodian v. Rivera

“A special motion to strike may be made against any claim in a civil action that arises out of any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.” ORS 31.150(2)(d).

Rivera appealed a limited judgment that denied her motion to strike, under Oregon’s anti-SLAPP statute, Davoodian’s civil action against her for IIED, civil extortion and a declaratory judgment that Rivera’s claims of alleged sexual assault were time barred.  On appeal, Rivera asserted Davoodian’s claims were based on her pre-litigation actions, which are protected by ORS 31.150(2)(d) because her allegations of sexual assault by an anesthesiologist at a prominent hospital invoked both a public issue and public interest. Davoodian argued Rivera’s conduct was extortion as a matter of law and further, because Davoodian is not a public figure and the alleged assault occurred in a private residence, there is no basis for Rivera to assert protection under ORS 31.150(2).  “A special motion to strike may be made against any claim in a civil action that arises out of any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.” ORS 31.150(2)(d).  The Court found Rivera’s conduct was protected by ORS 31.150(2) because (1) she exercised her right to commence litigation by sending Davoodian a draft complaint and letter, and (2) her allegations of sexual assault against an employee of a well-known public hospital were issues of public interest.  Further, Davoodian failed to plead sufficient facts to support a prima facie showing of his tort claims.  Reversed and remanded with instructions to grant defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion to strike plaintiff’s IIED and civil extortion claims; otherwise affirmed.