The Court held that a statement by an attorney on her firm’s website summarizing a jury’s verdict is not a statement in direct connection with an issue under consideration by a judicial body. The Court explained that because the statement is not a “good faith communication in furtherance of the right . . . to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern,” it would not receive anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) protection under NRS § 41.660(1).
Jaramillo, Haley, "Patin v. Lee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Nov. 15, 2018) (en banc)" (2018). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1206.