> >
| Case Name | Emmer v. Adobe Systems, Inc. | |
|---|---|---|
| Date | 12/28/2007 | |
| Note | [Unpublished] It is the gravamen of the plaintiff's cause of action that determines whether the anti-SLAPP statute applies, and when the allegations referring to arguably protected activity are only incidental to a cause of action based essentially on nonprotected activity, collateral allusions to protected activity should not subject the cause of action to the anti-SLAPP statute. | |
| Citation | H030685 | |
| WCC Citation | WCC 32952007 CA |
Ct. No. 1-04-CV013697) In this appeal, Jennifer Emmer seeks review of an order denying her special motion to strike the cross-complaint of respondent Adobe Systems Incorporated (Adobe) under Code of Civil Procedure section 425. 16 ("section 425. 16"), the "anti-SLAPP" statute. Background*fn1 Appellant began working for Adobe as an Engineering Manager in November 2000, after an extensive recruiting process. Appellant initiated an action against Adobe in November 2002, asserting one cause of action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. After hiring appellant, Chen introduced her to other Adobe employees and told them that appellant had graduated from Harvard University, without being corrected by appellant. With regard to the claim of unjust enrichment, Adobe alleged that appellant had "unjustly received salary, bonuses, and benefits .
Download full case here.
Download full case here.
