Univision Communications, Inc. v. Carlos Enrique Luna Lam

After the Florida Supreme Court adopted rule 9.130(a)(3)(J) (interlocutory appeals of orders denying Anti-SLAPP motions), Univision filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings that the trial court found substantively identical to its earlier, denied motion to dismiss; the court struck the motion under Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515 as lacking good grounds and interposed for delay. The Third District dismissed the appeal, holding an order striking (rather than denying) an Anti-SLAPP motion is not within rule 9.130(a)(3)(J), and denied certiorari and mandamus, holding rule 9.130(a)(3)(J) is not retroactive and that rule 2.515 authority to strike is not suspended merely because adjudication would create an appealable nonfinal order. Judge Logue dissented in part, arguing the striking device circumvented the Supreme Court's constitutional authority to authorize interlocutory appeals.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.