Appellant tenants sought review of the decision from the Superior Court of Alameda County (California), which dismissed appellant's malicious prosecution complaints against the respondent attorney.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. shares information on CRC Appointments

Overview

Plaintiff tenants filed a complaint for malicious prosecution and professional negligence naming as defendant attorney who had represented plaintiff's landlord in the arbitration and related proceedings. The trial court dismissed the cause of action. On appeal, the court found that the trial court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the cause of action for malicious prosecution on the basis that the private, contractual arbitration which terminated in their favor was not a prior action of the sort which will support such a claim. Further the court found that it was not error to sustain the demurrer as to the cause of action for professional negligence. The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.

Outcome

The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court because the trial court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the cause of action for malicious prosecution on the basis that the private, contractual arbitration which terminated in their favor was not a prior action of the sort which will support such a claim.