The Fifth District Court of Appeal, affirming an order denying a special motion to strike brought by a woman who is being sued by her ex-husband to halt her derisive Facebook posts, has rejected the contention that under case law, discussions of personal matters that have a link to topics of public interest are necessarily protected speech for purposes of the anti-SLAPP statute.

Div. Seven of this district’s Court of Appeal held yesterday that a trial judge erred in ordering a new trial after a jury found for the City of Los Angeles in a case involving allegations that its police force negligently maintained a less-lethal tactical launcher—which was found to have a problem with its targeting system after a protestor was hit just below the eye, causing vision impairment—based on an erroneous understanding of res ipsa loquitur.

(Subscription required) Orange County Superior Court Judge Justin Glenn-Leistikow never intended to become a lawyer. After the dot-com crash derailed his programming career, he found his way to the public defender's office, where nearly two decades of trial work shaped the judicial philosophy he now brings to the criminal bench.

(Subscription required) A divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an Oregon school district's ban on an educational specialist displaying children's books about gender identity in his office, with a forceful dissent warning the ruling gives public schools broad authority to suppress employees' personal expression on controversial issues.