April 28, 2025 | Los Angeles, CA — MedLegalNews.com – A California appeals court has reversed a previous FEHA claim dismissal under the state’s anti-SLAPP statute, allowing the plaintiff’s retaliation lawsuit to proceed
The case stems from a workplace retaliation lawsuit. Initially, the trial court granted a special motion to strike under the Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) statute, dismissing the employee’s claims. However, the plaintiff appealed, arguing that FEHA claims should not be subject to dismissal through an anti-SLAPP motion.
On review, the appellate court agreed. It emphasized that FEHA claims receive special protection under California law and are generally exempt from SLAPP procedures. While SLAPP laws aim to prevent abusive lawsuits targeting free speech and petitioning rights, the court explained that applying them too broadly could undermine critical employment rights protected by FEHA. Appeals Court Revives FEHA Claim
In reinstating the lawsuit, the appellate panel emphasized that California courts must carefully weigh constitutional protections for free speech against the compelling public interest in enforcing anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation statutes like those under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). While anti-SLAPP laws are intended to shield individuals and entities from frivolous litigation that seeks to chill protected expression, the court cautioned against applying such protections so broadly that they override statutory employee rights.
The ruling underscored that when fundamental workplace protections under FEHA are in question, courts must adopt a narrow and cautious approach in evaluating anti-SLAPP motions. Blanket dismissal of such claims could create a chilling effect, discouraging employees from coming forward with legitimate allegations of workplace discrimination or retaliation—particularly in sensitive contexts involving whistleblowers or protected class members.
By sending the retaliation and discrimination claims back to the trial court for further proceedings, the appellate decision reinforces the judiciary’s role in upholding worker protections while clarifying the boundaries of procedural defenses. Legal analysts suggest the decision may lead to more stringent scrutiny of anti-SLAPP motions in employment cases going forward.
For employers, this case serves as a cautionary precedent. Those facing FEHA lawsuits must now more carefully assess whether filing an anti-SLAPP motion is appropriate—or whether doing so risks early dismissal of valid claims being overturned on appeal. Legal counsel will likely advise a more nuanced strategy when navigating litigation involving civil rights and workplace protections under California law.
Source: Department of Rehabilitation
Stay updated on critical employment law decisions. Subscribe to MedLegalNews.com today.
Read More from MedLegalNews.com:
- California Attorney General Bonta Reaches $1.3 Million Settlement in Fake Health Insurance Case
- Construction Company Cited $157,500 After Fatal Trench Collapse
- Support Fire Recovery Efforts: California Invests $25 Million
- California Lawmakers Demand Answers Over $3.44 Billion Medi-Cal Loan
FAQs: FEHA Claim Dismissal and Anti-SLAPP Law in California
What is a FEHA claim?
A FEHA claim refers to a legal complaint filed under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, which protects employees against discrimination, retaliation, and harassment in the workplace.
Why was the FEHA claim initially dismissed under SLAPP?
The trial court applied California’s anti-SLAPP law, which is designed to prevent lawsuits that chill free speech. It mistakenly treated the retaliation claim as a protected speech matter.
What did the appeals court decide?
The appellate court ruled that FEHA claims are generally exempt from anti-SLAPP motions because they involve critical employment protections and public policy interests.
What does this ruling mean for employers?
Employers can no longer rely on anti-SLAPP motions to easily dismiss FEHA-related lawsuits. The ruling reinforces that discrimination and retaliation claims deserve full review in court.
Can other anti-discrimination cases bypass SLAPP laws now?
Yes, if they fall under FEHA or involve similar legal protections, courts may determine that SLAPP laws should not apply.