Fee petition mechanics · Updated June 2026
Anti-SLAPP attorney fee petition mechanics: California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date as primary motion-date Welch anchor under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16, § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory "shall be entitled" fee documentation advisory, and anti-SLAPP fee petition advisory
Anti-SLAPP defense solos billing hourly on Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory attorney fees — whose time records must satisfy the contemporaneous-documentation standard required by Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) for any § 425.16(c)(1) fee petition, with the California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date as the primary Welch temporal anchor (anti-SLAPP is the only practice area in the fee-petition-mechanics series where the primary Welch anchor is a MOTION FILING DATE — not a civil complaint filing date, not an administrative regulatory notice, not an arbitration demand, not a county recorder document, not a PACER federal court filing, not an OEHHA notice, not an LWDA notice, not a CRD administrative complaint, not a DFPI consumer complaint, not county APS records, not private HOA corporate records — the § 425.16 special motion to strike filing date simultaneously starts the fee-recoverable period and triggers the § 425.16(g) automatic stay of all discovery) — generate three billing gaps driven by advisory calls arriving on external calendars outside counsel's control: § 425.16 anti-SLAPP motion filing and § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay advisory calls arriving on the court's anti-SLAPP motion briefing schedule (7 active clients × 2 calls × 42 min × 55% untracked ≈ 5.39 hrs = $1,617–$2,695/year at $300–$500/hr), § 425.16(b)(2) probability-of-prevailing two-prong merits preparation advisory calls arriving on the court's anti-SLAPP hearing calendar (6 clients × 3 calls × 44 min × 55% untracked ≈ 7.26 hrs = $2,178–$3,630/year), and § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory "shall be entitled to recover" fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory calls arriving on the post-ruling calendar (5 clients × 2 calls × 44 min × 55% ≈ 4.03 hrs = $1,210–$2,017/year). For a solo anti-SLAPP defense practice, the annual billing gap from advisory call underlogging is $5,005–$8,342.
TL;DR
ClaimHour captures every § 425.16 anti-SLAPP motion filing advisory call that triggers the § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay, every § 425.16(b)(2) two-prong merits hearing preparation call arriving on the court's anti-SLAPP briefing calendar, and every § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory call arriving after a prevailing anti-SLAPP ruling — passively, no timer, no audio, no call contents. $29–$59/mo. No PMS required.
§ 425.16 anti-SLAPP motion filing and § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay advisory: calls on the Superior Court anti-SLAPP motion briefing calendar
The California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date — indexed in the Superior Court civil docket when the Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 special motion to strike is filed — is the primary Welch temporal anchor for anti-SLAPP billing documentation. Anti-SLAPP is the only practice area in the fee-petition-mechanics series where the primary Welch anchor is a MOTION FILING DATE — not a civil complaint filing date (which is the primary anchor in most civil practice areas including probate litigation, medical malpractice, personal injury, and family law), not an administrative regulatory notice or claim filing (used in PAGA/LWDA, FEHA/CRD, CCPA/AG data breach, OEHHA Prop 65 notice, NLRB, EEOC), not a county recorder document (used in partition, mechanic's lien, HOA assessment collection), not a federal court PACER docket entry (used in securities whistleblower, FINRA arbitration, ADA federal claims), not a private institutional database (used in AAA commercial arbitration, HOA private corporate records), not county APS social services records. The § 425.16 special motion to strike filing date simultaneously starts the § 425.16(c)(1) fee-recoverable period AND triggers the § 425.16(g) automatic stay of all discovery in the action — the first time in the series that a single filing event has two immediate legal consequences beyond starting the Hensley lodestar clock.
Three § 425.16 motion filing and § 425.16(g) discovery stay advisory call types generate untracked billing: (1) § 425.16(b)(1) protected activity prong analysis and motion preparation advisory — arrives when the § 425.16 special motion to strike strategy is being developed (requiring § 425.16(b)(1) first-prong protected activity showing — defendant must demonstrate that the challenged cause of action arises from an act in furtherance of the defendant's right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue; Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82 — § 425.16 applies to any claim arising from protected activity without limitation to formal defamation claims; Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299 — constitutional exception for criminal conduct; § 425.16(e)(1)–(4) protected activity categories: legislative or executive proceedings; official proceedings authorized by law; issues of public interest; public forum statements; § 425.17 commercial speech exemption carve-out; California Superior Court CMS § 425.16 motion filing date as primary Welch temporal anchor for § 425.16(c)(1) fee purposes — 42–48 min); (2) § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay and § 425.16(f) hearing scheduling advisory — arrives immediately after § 425.16 motion is filed (requiring § 425.16(g) automatic stay of all discovery upon filing of § 425.16 notice of motion; § 425.16(g) good cause showing to lift stay for discovery needed to oppose the motion; § 425.16(f) hearing on special motion to strike scheduled not more than 30 days after service of the motion unless court extends for good cause; CRC Rule 3.1342 opposition filing deadline 14 days before hearing; anti-SLAPP briefing calendar as the external calendar driving all advisory call timing during the § 425.16(g) stay period — all advisory calls during the stay are on the court's briefing schedule, not the attorney's billing cycle — 42–48 min); (3) § 425.16(b)(2) plaintiff's probability-of-prevailing showing and § 425.16 fee exposure advisory — arrives when the plaintiff is preparing its opposition to the § 425.16 motion (requiring § 425.16(b)(2) second-prong — plaintiff must demonstrate a probability of prevailing on each challenged claim through admissible evidence — minimum merit standard; § 425.16(b)(2) 'probability of prevailing' — not preponderance, not clear and convincing, but sufficient admissible evidence to demonstrate that the claim is both legally sufficient and supported by a sufficient prima facie showing of facts to sustain a favorable judgment; § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fees flow to prevailing defendant if plaintiff cannot satisfy § 425.16(b)(2); Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 628 — § 425.16 motion may be brought at any time before or concurrently with responsive pleading — 42–48 min). At 55% untracked: 7 clients × 2 calls × 42 min × 55% = 323.4 min / 60 = 5.39 hours = $1,617–$2,695/year at $300–$500/hr.
§ 425.16(b)(2) probability-of-prevailing two-prong merits preparation advisory: calls on the Superior Court anti-SLAPP hearing calendar
The California Superior Court anti-SLAPP hearing calendar — set by the § 425.16(f) hearing scheduling rule (not more than 30 days from service of motion unless extended for good cause) — governs the merits preparation phase of anti-SLAPP litigation. The court's anti-SLAPP briefing schedule drives when the plaintiff must submit its opposition with admissible evidence and when the defendant must submit its reply, creating an adversarial calendar entirely outside the billing attorney's control. Equilon Enterprises LLC v. Consumer Cause Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53 confirmed that the § 425.16(b) two-prong analysis requires the court to engage in a two-step process: first, whether the defendant has made a threshold showing that the challenged cause of action arises from protected activity; second, if that threshold is met, whether the plaintiff has established a probability of prevailing on its claim. Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82 — § 425.16 applies to contract claims, not just defamation. § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fees accrue from the § 425.16 motion filing date through the ruling and through the § 425.16(c)(1) fee petition on the post-ruling calendar.
Three § 425.16(b)(2) two-prong merits preparation advisory call types generate untracked billing: (1) plaintiff's opposition declaration and admissible evidence preparation advisory — arrives when the plaintiff's attorney must prepare admissible evidence to satisfy the § 425.16(b)(2) probability-of-prevailing standard (requiring § 425.16(b)(2) admissible evidence standard — plaintiff may not rely solely on the complaint's allegations, but must submit declarations, deposition excerpts, or documentary evidence that demonstrate the claim is legally sufficient and factually supported; § 425.16(g) discovery stay limits plaintiff's ability to obtain new evidence during the briefing period; § 425.16(g) good cause motion to lift stay for targeted discovery; Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299 constitutional exception — § 425.16 does not apply where defendant's conduct was illegal as a matter of law; § 47 absolute litigation privilege defense analysis if underlying claim arises from statements in judicial proceedings — 44–50 min); (2) § 425.17 commercial speech exemption and § 425.16 statutory exceptions analysis advisory — arrives when the plaintiff evaluates whether the underlying claim falls within a § 425.17 exception to anti-SLAPP protection (requiring § 425.17(b) commercial speech exemption — § 425.16 does not apply to actions arising from statements or conduct by a person primarily engaged in the business of selling or leasing goods or services to consumers and made for the purpose of obtaining approval for, promoting, or securing sales; § 425.17(c) public enforcement action exemption — § 425.16 does not apply to enforcement actions brought in the public interest; § 425.16(d)(2) application to cross-complaints; Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376 — mixed causes of action: § 425.16 applies to individually pleaded allegations even if not to entire cause of action; § 425.18 SLAPPback actions by SLAPP defendants — 44–50 min); (3) Flatley constitutional exception and Cal. Civ. Code § 47 absolute privilege defense analysis advisory — arrives when the plaintiff argues that the defendant's alleged conduct was criminal or otherwise beyond the scope of § 425.16 protection (requiring Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299 — § 425.16 does not protect criminal conduct; § 47(b) litigation privilege — absolute privilege for publications made in any judicial proceeding; § 47(c) common interest privilege — qualified privilege for communications between interested parties; § 47(d) fair report privilege — fair and true report of judicial proceedings; anti-SLAPP § 425.16 and § 47 privilege operate independently — § 47 may defeat the merits claim even if § 425.16 is not satisfied; § 425.16(b)(1) vs. § 425.16(b)(2) independent analysis — 44–50 min). At 55% untracked: 6 clients × 3 calls × 44 min × 55% = 435.6 min / 60 = 7.26 hours = $2,178–$3,630/year at $300–$500/hr.
§ 425.16(c)(1) mandatory "shall be entitled to recover" fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory: calls on the post-ruling calendar
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c)(1) — "a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney's fees and costs" — is mandatory once the defendant prevails on the § 425.16 special motion to strike; no exceptionality showing, no three-part public benefit test, no jury submission. The fee entitlement under § 425.16(c)(1) is independent of the ultimate outcome of the case — a defendant who prevails on the § 425.16 motion recovers mandatory fees for the motion period even if the case continues on other non-SLAPP claims or is later resolved unfavorably to the defendant. § 425.16(c)(2) extends mandatory fee entitlement to any appeal of the § 425.16 ruling — a defendant who successfully defends a § 425.16 ruling on appeal recovers fees for the appellate period under § 425.16(c)(2). Ketchum v. Moses 24 Cal.4th 1122 (2001) positive multiplier is available for the § 425.16(c)(1) California mandatory component when exceptional skill or novelty of anti-SLAPP law justifies enhancement. PLCM Group Inc. v. Drexler 22 Cal.4th 1084 (2000) California prevailing market rate. Hensley v. Eckerhart 461 U.S. 424 (1983) lodestar from § 425.16 motion filing date. Missouri v. Jenkins 491 U.S. 274 (1989) fees-on-fees for fee petition hours.
Two § 425.16(c)(1) post-ruling advisory call types generate untracked billing: (1) § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory "shall be entitled to recover" fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory — arrives when the anti-SLAPP motion is granted and the defendant's fee petition must be prepared (requiring § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory 'shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney's fees and costs' upon prevailing on § 425.16 special motion to strike; Ketchum v. Moses 24 Cal.4th 1122 (2001) positive multiplier for § 425.16(c)(1) California mandatory component when exceptional skill, novelty of anti-SLAPP constitutional issue, or complexity of two-prong analysis justifies enhancement; PLCM Group 22 Cal.4th 1084 California prevailing market rate for anti-SLAPP defense solos; Hensley lodestar from California Superior Court CMS § 425.16 motion filing date through § 425.16(f) hearing date through ruling; Missouri v. Jenkins 491 U.S. 274 (1989) fees-on-fees for § 425.16(c)(1) fee petition preparation hours — 44–50 min); (2) § 425.16(c)(2) appellate fee entitlement and Hensley partial-success segregation advisory — arrives when the plaintiff appeals the § 425.16 ruling, triggering a new fee-recoverable appellate period (requiring § 425.16(c)(2) — in any action subject to subdivision (b), a prevailing defendant on appeal of a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover their attorney's fees and costs; § 425.16(c)(2) appellate fee entitlement is independent of § 425.16(c)(1) trial-court fee entitlement — two separate mandatory fee awards arise; Hensley partial-success limitation if defendant prevailed on some but not all § 425.16 anti-SLAPP challenges in the same action; § 425.16(c)(1) fees for trial-court motion period vs. § 425.16(c)(2) fees for appellate period are separately documented in the fee petition; Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82 — anti-SLAPP appellate fee entitlement applies to all successful appeals — 44–50 min). At 55% untracked: 5 clients × 2 calls × 44 min × 55% = 242 min / 60 = 4.03 hours = $1,210–$2,017/year at $300–$500/hr.
How ClaimHour fits anti-SLAPP defense practice
Anti-SLAPP defense solos billing hourly on Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fees — with § 425.16 anti-SLAPP motion filing and § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay advisory calls arriving on the California Superior Court CMS § 425.16 motion briefing calendar the moment the special motion to strike is filed, § 425.16(b)(2) two-prong merits hearing preparation advisory calls arriving on the court's anti-SLAPP hearing calendar during the § 425.16(g) stay period, and § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory "shall be entitled to recover" fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory calls arriving on the post-ruling calendar and on the § 425.16(c)(2) appellate fee calendar — and if your § 425.16(c)(1) lodestar documentation must satisfy Hensley specificity from the California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date (the only motion-date primary Welch anchor in the fee-petition-mechanics series), through the § 425.16(g) discovery stay period, through the § 425.16(f) hearing date, through the § 425.16(c)(1) fee petition, ClaimHour was built for that gap.
Related questions
Why is the California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date the primary Welch anchor for anti-SLAPP billing, and how does it differ from every other primary anchor in the fee-petition-mechanics series?
The California Superior Court CMS anti-SLAPP motion filing date — indexed when the § 425.16 special motion to strike is filed — is the only MOTION FILING DATE primary Welch anchor in the fee-petition-mechanics series. Every other primary anchor in the series is a complaint, claim, notice, or administrative filing date. The § 425.16 special motion to strike filing date simultaneously starts the § 425.16(c)(1) fee-recoverable period AND triggers the § 425.16(g) automatic stay of all discovery — two immediate legal consequences from a single filing event, unique in the series.
How does Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory 'shall be entitled to recover' compare to other mandatory fee statutes in the fee-petition-mechanics series?
§ 425.16(c)(1) 'a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney's fees and costs' — mandatory, no exceptionality showing unlike Lanham Act Octane Fitness, no three-part public benefit test unlike CCP § 1021.5, no jury submission unlike Brandt. Unique: § 425.16(c)(1) fee entitlement is independent of the ultimate case outcome — a defendant who prevails on the § 425.16 motion recovers mandatory fees even if the case continues or is later resolved unfavorably. § 425.16(c)(2) extends fee entitlement to any appeal of the § 425.16 ruling — two separate mandatory fee awards possible. Ketchum v. Moses 24 Cal.4th 1122 (2001) positive multiplier. PLCM Group 22 Cal.4th 1084 California prevailing market rate. Jenkins fees-on-fees.
How does the § 425.16(g) automatic discovery stay generate billing gaps on the anti-SLAPP motion briefing calendar?
§ 425.16(g) automatic stay of all discovery upon filing of the § 425.16 special motion to strike creates a concentrated briefing period during which all case activity is focused on the two-prong anti-SLAPP hearing. Advisory calls during the stay arrive on the court's briefing calendar — opposition deadline (14 days before hearing under CRC Rule 3.1342), reply deadline, § 425.16(f) hearing — not on any billing cycle the attorney controls. Three call types: § 425.16(b)(1) protected activity prong analysis and motion preparation advisory (42–48 min); § 425.16(g) discovery stay and § 425.16(f) hearing scheduling advisory (42–48 min); § 425.16(b)(2) plaintiff probability-of-prevailing and fee exposure advisory (42–48 min). At 55% untracked: 5.39 hours = $1,617–$2,695/year.
How does the § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory generate billing gaps on the post-ruling calendar in anti-SLAPP practice?
§ 425.16(c)(1) mandatory 'shall be entitled to recover' — no exceptionality showing, no public benefit test, no jury submission. § 425.16(c)(2) extends fee entitlement to appeals. Ketchum v. Moses 24 Cal.4th 1122 (2001) positive multiplier for § 425.16(c)(1) California mandatory component. Hensley lodestar from § 425.16 motion filing date through ruling. PLCM Group 22 Cal.4th 1084 California prevailing market rate. Jenkins fees-on-fees for fee petition hours. Two call types: § 425.16(c)(1) mandatory fee petition and Ketchum multiplier advisory (44–50 min); § 425.16(c)(2) appellate fee entitlement and Hensley partial-success segregation advisory (44–50 min). At 55% untracked: 4.03 hours = $1,210–$2,017/year. Total annual gap: $5,005–$8,342.