1DCA Division 4 Oral Argument - 2026/01/27 - Jan 27, 2026

argument

1DCA Division 4 Oral Argument - 2026/01/27

California First District Court of Appeal 1h 45m 8 chapters transcribed 7 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the purpose of the oral argument and who are the parties involved?

Unknown 0:15

Good morning and please be seated. Let's call uh the first matter on calendar home port insurance versus McCrae.

Unknown 0:45

Do we have someone appearing remotely? Mr. Doolittle perhaps? Yes, it should be on the screen if you haven't seen its apparent.

Unknown 1:00

Ms. Garcia, do we know where Mr. Doolittle is? Oh there we go. Okay. Okay. Uh so we just called line one and look. Can you hear? Give me a thumbs up for yes or thumbs down for no. Apparently not.

Unknown 1:34

Can't hear.

Unknown 1:45

Can you hear us now? Yes. Okay, we're echoing a little bit. I don't know why though. But let's go ahead. Um can we uh begin with appearances uh from council starting with uh the folks on the screen, please.

Eric McFarland 2:04

Yes, uh good morning, Your Honor, Eric McFarlane, on behalf of the real parties, Michael Day and Laura Allen.

Unknown 2:11

Uh that's the wrong case. We're actually on uh the first case, which is homeport insurance versus McRae.

Wallace Doolittle 2:21

Yes, your honors. May it please the court wallace doolittle on behalf of plaintiff and appellant home port insurance.

Unknown 2:28

Okay. And here in uh the courtroom.

Wallace Doolittle 2:31

Oh, I can't hear you again.

Unknown 2:32

Oh.

Randy Miller 2:34

Thank you, Your Honors. Randy Miller for respondents, Philip Welton and Welton Strep.

Unknown 2:40

Okay, and let me ask Mr. Doolittle, can you hear us okay now?

Wallace Doolittle 2:44

Now I can hear you. Okay, great. Thank you.

Unknown 2:47

All right. Go ahead.

Wallace Doolittle 2:50

Yes, may it please the court wait a second. Oh, sorry.

Unknown 3:00

And let me ask uh counsel who are in the courtroom first, uh, how do you plan to split up the argument if you plan to at all?

Randy Miller 3:09

We have discussed it, Your Honor. Uh Rain Miller. I'll start with my remarks. Uh if we have fifteen minutes, I'm thinking the allocation was gonna be about ten minutes for me, and then Ms. Shul will follow up with the ballot.

Unknown 3:21

Okay, thank you very much. You can be seated. And now let's turn back to uh Mr. Doolittle and let me ask you uh to start, did you wish to reserve any of your fifteen minutes for rebuttal?

Wallace Doolittle 3:33

Yes, I wish to reserve ten minutes. I only have brief comments at the beginning, uh Your Honor.

Unknown 3:38

All right, so we're gonna put uh five minutes, I guess, on our clock here. You're gonna have to keep track on your own because I don't believe you can see our clock here in the courtroom. And with that you may proceed.

Wallace Doolittle 3:53

Yes, uh may it please the court, uh Wallace Doolittle on behalf of appellant and plaintiff homeport insurance. Um this matter is very, very extensively briefed and very well briefed, I think, by both sides. I know the justices don't want to hear a repeat of what's already in our briefs. So I would just like to um uh highlight a few uh points um that I believe are salient in uh from both our opening brief and our reply brief. Um the first thing I would like to talk about is that the um anti-slap statutes are And the accompanying mandatory attorneys fee portion of the statutes are a shield, not a sword. Meaning Um as we argue in page seven of our reply brief. Um It appears that in this case, because the uh defendants were never served and they entered the case voluntarily.

Wallace Doolittle 4:52

The attorney's fees became the object of the case rather than the consequence. And um we argue that um Uh The causation of the attorney's fees itself is not the service of the uh the lawsuit against the Weltons and the Welton Law Firm. In fact, um because they all entered the uh their appearances voluntarily and were never served. If we take a look at the stat the anti slap statute. Um it's implied in the language of the statute, as we argue Starting on page seven of our reply brief. It's implied in the language of the statute. that the motion can be filed Within sixty days after the defendant is served, it doesn't say served or enters an appearance, or it doesn't also say within sixty days of the court obtaining jurisdiction over the defendant.

Wallace Doolittle 5:52

Um, as we know, jurisdiction can be obtained both um by service and by a voluntary appearance. But the statute So

Unknown 6:00

but Mike let me just jump in with uh here for a moment. You've said twice that you uh and and can and said candidly that you raised the argument in your reply brief. That was the first time you raised the argument, correct?

Wallace Doolittle 6:15

No, uh I'm sorry. Um I I was just pointing to the argument as we fleshed it out in the reply brief.