Appellate Litigation

The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, recently reversed a defense verdict in Higginson v. Kia Motors America, Inc., No. D082322, 2026 WL 82098 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 3, 2026), ordering a new trial and monetary sanctions due to the defendant’s discovery misconduct. The decision highlights the critical importance of proper search term methodology, good-faith participation in meet and confer processes, and accurate verification of discovery responses.

The Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, recently revisited the appealability of district court denials of anti-SLAPP motions. For over two decades, immediate appeals of such denials were permitted. However, relying on the strict limits of the collateral order doctrine, the Ninth Circuit has reversed this stance, holding that anti-SLAPP denials are not immediately appealable in federal court. Consequently, where an anti-SLAPP motion is litigated in federal court, parties must now litigate to final judgment before seeking appellate review of an anti-SLAPP motion denial. Gopher Media LLC v. Melone, 154 F.4th 696 (9th Cir. 2025) (en banc). This rule stands in sharp contrast to California state court procedure, which permits immediate appeals from anti-SLAPP denials.