California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Kattuah v. Firm, B269560 (Cal. App. 2017):
In the second step of the anti-SLAPP analysis, "the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate that each challenged claim based on protected activity is legally sufficient and factually substantiated. The court, without resolving evidentiary conflicts, must determine whether the plaintiff's showing, if accepted by the trier of fact, would be sufficient to sustain a favorable judgment. If not, the claim is stricken." (Baral v. Schnitt, supra, 1 Cal.5th at pp. 396.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.