Developer Suit Against Critic Is Dismissed : Burbank: The decision could be a blow to so-called SLAPP actions, which some charge are a tool of intimidation.
A judge Monday dismissed a developer’s lawsuit against a woman who voiced environmental concerns about his plans to build 129 luxury houses in the mountains above Burbank.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Arnold Gold ruled that the woman’s opposition was protected by constitutional guarantees of free speech and the freedom to petition the government.
The lawsuit by builder Sherman Whitmore against Annette C. Baecker had drawn national attention as an example of suits initiated by developers against their critics. Such actions have been dubbed SLAPP suits by critics--”strategic lawsuits against public participation.”
Baecker and her lawyer, Barry Fisher, said they are considering a legal action against Whitmore to recover more than $18,000 in legal fees she incurred during the eight-month legal fight.
“I am elated over the victory,” Baecker said by telephone from Portland, Ore., where she moved two months ago because of her husband’s job transfer.
“I never doubted the validity of my actions, but I am extremely relieved. It was a very heavy feeling to have this on me--extremely chilling. It has been a long process, but it shows the Constitution holds up,” she said.
Whitmore could not be reached for comment. His attorney, Brian Bird, did not return calls Monday.
Fisher and others said the lawsuit, filed in December, resembled those filed by developers across the country. Developers have sued groups and individuals who have proposed building moratoriums, written letters to newspapers expressing anti-development views and used other means to try to block developments.
Penelope Canan, a University of Denver sociologist who has taken part in an eight-year study of SLAPP suits, said most are dismissed on constitutional grounds. She said many developers sue knowing that they will be unsuccessful.
“The motive is not to win in court,” Canan said. “They are using the courts for political purpose, to eliminate opponents to their developments. They don’t want citizen concerns to hold up their business.”
Although Baecker’s victory was not unusual, her lawyer said it might help convince developers that such lawsuits are the wrong way to quell opposition.
“It hopefully telegraphs a message to developers,” Fisher said. “Los Angeles is developer-rich . . . and it is a community of often frustrated developers. They are quickest to lash out against those citizens who care about the environment and speak out at public forums. This was a SLAPP suit that has been slapped down and hopefully developers will see that it doesn’t pay.”
The suit against Baecker arose out of Whitmore’s eight-year struggle to build a housing tract on 117 acres he owns in Cabrini Canyon in the Verdugo Mountains above Burbank.
A group called the Burbank Mountain Reserve Protection Assn., headed by Baecker, fought the proposal for several years. It argued that 1.4 acres of protected wetlands would be destroyed when the canyon was graded.
Last year, Whitmore agreed with state officials to enhance 3 1/2 acres of wildlife habitat elsewhere as mitigation for grading the canyon. His company, Burbank Hill Properties, agreed to pay $150,000 to the Mountain Restoration Trust, a private corporation that buys land for wildlife habitat. The money is to be held by the state Department of Fish and Game until an appropriate site for the mitigation is selected.
Whitmore’s suit alleged that Baecker called trust members and told them that the project would not be good for Burbank and that she would do anything in her power to stop it. Although the trust did not pull out of the agreement, Whitmore alleged that Baecker illegally tried to block the project by interfering with a contract agreement.
Baecker denied that she attempted to influence trust representatives. She said she was exercising her right to question officials involved in a public issue.
“A telephone call was placed . . . to find out where the mitigation was going to occur,” she said Monday. “I never had any self-interest other than to preserve the wetlands.”
Baecker’s cause drew support from numerous Burbank officials and activists. Earlier this month, a fund was started to defray her legal expenses. More than $3,500 has been collected so far.
Baecker’s supporters praised Monday’s victory but said their enthusiasm was tempered by their belief that Whitmore was at least partly successful in intimidating his critics.
“Mrs. Baecker was really made an example of because she was a spokeswoman for a large group of people who opposed the destruction of this canyon,” said Connie Wilson, vice president of the Burbank Mountain Reserve Protection Assn.
“Intimidation ran through the community” after the suit was filed, she said. “It was scary.”
The Assembly is considering a state Senate-passed bill that would make SLAPP suits more difficult to file and allow the targets to collect attorneys’ fees if they prevail.
Gene Wong, a Senate Judiciary Committee staff member, said the proposed law could help civic activists avoid long and expensive legal fights such as Baecker’s.
“She got out at an early stage, but it still cost her $20,000,” said Wong, who interviewed Baecker while conducting research for the bill. “We don’t want people to think they would have been better off if they had not said anything.”
