A prior appellate opinion in the case based on the pleadings is not the law of the case as to later proceedings in the case if the pleading is materially changed after the prior opinion.  Here, an opinion on an Anti-SLAPP motion directed at the original complaint was not the law of the case as to a later similar motion against an amended complaint that substantially changed the nature of the pleading. On remand from the California Supreme Court, this decision holds that several paragraphs of plaintiff’s complaint allege protected conduct that forms the basis of claims for declaratory relief and breach of contract.  As the plaintiff submitted no evidence to show a probability of success on those allegations, they must be stricken.  But the declaratory relief and breach of contract claims continue insofar as they are based on allegations of non-protected conduct.  Also, allegations of protected conduct that merely provide the context for the claims are not stricken.

California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3 (Fybel, J.); April 19, 2018 (published May 9, 2018); 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 419