Anderson v. Wilken, 377 P.3d 149

In Aug 2014 Anderson sued Claremore Daily Progress (Newspaper) for false-light invasion of privacy based on reporting.
In Dec 2014 Newspaper moved to dismiss under the Oklahoma Citizens Participation Act (OCPA).
The trial judge recused and the court did not set or hold the OCPA hearing within the statutory timeframe.
The trial court entered an order stating the motion was "deemed denied" for failure to set a hearing; Newspaper appealed that denial.
The appellate court found no hearing had occurred and thus no reviewable, appealable ruling on the merits existed under the OCPA.
The appellate court treated Newspaper's filing as a petition for a writ and granted a writ directing the trial court to set and hold the statutorily required hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether failure to set an OCPA hearing results in motion being "deemed denied" and is appealable	Anderson argued OCPA was not invoked and moved to dismiss the appeal; she accepted the deemed-denied characterization below	Newspaper argued §1487(A) makes a court's failure to set a hearing result in a denial by operation of law, creating an appealable order	Held: Failure to set a hearing does not itself create a deemed denial under §1487; no appealable order exists absent the required hearing and post-hearing ruling
Proper appellate remedy when trial court fails to set statutorily required hearing	Anderson urged dismissal of appeal for lack of invocation of OCPA	Newspaper sought immediate appellate review of denial	Held: The appropriate remedy is a writ compelling the trial court to set and hold the required OCPA hearing; appellate court granted writ
Standard of review for OCPA dismissal proceedings	Anderson relied on traditional motion-to-dismiss standards	Newspaper urged application of OCPA's shifted burdens (movant shows case relates to free speech; plaintiff must show prima facie case)	Held: OCPA procedure differs from traditional dismissal review; because no hearing occurred, appellate court will not apply merits standards now and remands for the statutorily-mandated hearing

Wilson v. State ex rel. State Election Bd., 270 P.3d 155 (Okla. 2012) (describes traditional motion-to-dismiss factual-assumption standard)
Tuffy's, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City, 212 P.3d 1158 (Okla. 2009) (movant bears burden to show legal insufficiency on traditional dismissal)
South Western Okla. Dev. Auth. v. Sullivan Engine Works, Inc., 910 P.2d 1052 (Okla. 1996) (statutory interpretation follows plain meaning and legislative intent)
In re Supreme Court Adjudication, Etc., 597 P.2d 1208 (Okla. 1979) (statutes should be interpreted to render every provision operative)
State ex rel. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Oklahoma v. Lucas, 297 P.3d 378 (Okla. 2013) (denial of motion to dismiss is not a final order for appeal)