There are limits to the TCPA, and the San Antonio COA became the second Texas COA, joining Dallas, in rejecting an attempt to Anti-Slapp a subpoena. See Greiner v. Womack, No. 04-19-00525-CV (San Antonio COA Oct. 23, 2019). The opinion is short, evidencing the lack of compelling arguments the COA had to work through. The only shorter TCPA opinions are those rejecting prematurely filed appeals.

We hold the subpoena is not a legal action. Appellants note the subpoena was a “filing” in the trial court. But not all filings are legal actions. See id. § 27.001(6). A “filing” is a “legal action” only if it “requests legal or equitable relief.” Id. The subpoena did not request legal or equitable relief or purport to assert a “claim in question” upon which Womack would be required to present a prima facie case in response to the motion. See Dow Jones & Co., Inc. v. Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 564 S.W.3d 852, 856–57 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2018, pet. denied) (holding a subpoena is not a “filing” that seeks legal or equitable relief). We cannot say the trial court erred by denying appellants’ TCPA motion.

Hammer Egg.jpg