Before the Court en banc. Opinion by Justice Gibbons.
In these consolidated appeals, the Court held that a defendant cannot file an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit against a plaintiff who voluntarily dismisses the action before the defendant files either an initial responsive pleading or a special motion to dismiss pursuant to NRS 41.670. Mr. Strickland had filed a complaint against Mr. Stubbs for libel per se and negligent infliction of emotional distress based on content posted on the internet by Mr. Stubbs. Mr. Strickland voluntarily dismissed his complaint, however, before Mr. Stubbs had filed an answer or any other pleading. Subsequently, Mr. Stubbs filed a separate complaint based on Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statutes. NRS 41.635 et seq. The Court found that the plain language of NRS 41.670 only permits a defendant to bring an anti-SLAPP suit after the district court has granted a special motion to dismiss. The Court declined to penalize plaintiffs who opt to discontinue frivolous lawsuits so that a plaintiff has a window within which they may reconsider the wisdom of their actions without penalty and defendants can be extracted from a lawsuit quickly and inexpensively. Affirmed. (Adam Hosmer-Henner, Associate in the Reno office of McDonald Carano Wilson.)
