But the really good part of all this, the one that makes me smile broadly, is that California's anti-SLAPP law, designed for just this sort of situation, worked just like it was designed.  The anti-SLAPP legislation, whose full title is "anti Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation," was designed to stop Plaintiffs from filing scurrilous lawsuits against Defendants just to shut them up on a public issue, by overpowering them with litigation they cannot afford.  The law provides for the Defendants, by allowing them to collect their attorney fees from the Plaintiff almost immediately upon winning a Motion to Dismiss.  The trio were able to forestall that original payment only because they appealed the original Judge's decision to the California Appeals Court, then to the  California Supreme Court - where they were soundly, and publicly, horse-whipped. 

The trio, apparently, aren't willing to acknowledge their debt, nor their loss.  Now, the "collection" process has begun, and the Courts are allowing a ruthless approach to that collection, "as follows:  Levy on any & all bank deposit  accounts held in name or interest of judgment debtor as well as accounts receivable, lines of credit, general intangibles, and/or proceeds thereof in which he has an interest individually or jointly, include contents of any safety deposit to which he has access;  SSN:113-44-9446"