Murphy v. Rosen

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of the plaintiff’s defamation action under the anti-SLAPP statute because he did not show probable cause that calling him a “white supremacist” in the described social-media exchange was actionable defamation. The court held that the term, without more, expressed a subjective opinion rather than an objectively verifiable fact or an implication of undisclosed defamatory facts, particularly in the context of heated political name-calling. The court also affirmed the denial of reconsideration and the award of attorney’s fees and costs.