Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Hylton v. Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., No. D053371

By FindLaw Staff on September 24, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In plaintiff's legal malpractice action against his former attorney seeking damages and rescission of a contingency fee contract, trial court's denial of defendant's anti-SLAPP motion is affirmed as: 1) the trial court correctly ruled that defendant had not met his threshold burden of showing that plaintiff's claims arise from petitioning activity within the purview of the anti-SLAPP statute; and 2) this rendered unnecessary any consideration of defendant's arguments that plaintiff failed to show probable success on the merits. 

Read Hylton v. Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., No. D053371

Filed September 23, 2009


Opinion by Judge McDonald


For Appellant:  Frank E. Rogozienski, Inc., Frank E. Rogozienski; Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek and Gerald L. McMahon

For Appelle:  Stephen M. Hogan; Herron & Steele and Matthew V. Herron

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard