Mullenaux v. Graham County (2004)
green
· 14 citation events
across 2 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Cullen v. Koty-Leavitt Insurance Agency, Inc. (2007)
Co., 129 Ariz. 165, 166-67 , 629 P.2d 1001, 1002-03 (App. 1981) (“The test to be applied in resolving whether the complaint established that appellant is entitled to relief under any theory of law is whether the complaint, taken in the light most favorable to appellant, is sufficient to constitute a valid claim.”) (emphasis added); cf. Mullenaux v. Graham County, 207 Ariz. 1, ¶ 18 , 82 P.3d 362, 367 (App. 2004) (“[O]ur courts have long held that ‘failure to make reference to…
“[O]ur courts have long held that ‘failure to make reference to a statute [in a complaint] is not fatal to a claim.’”
green
Daniel Vargas v. MLEM Properties Incorporated (2026)
This statute 18 establishes a right of action for whistleblower retaliation for public employees only. 19 Mullenaux v. Graham Cnty., 207 Ariz. 1, 6 (App. 2004) (“§ 38-532 applies only to public 20 employees.”).
“§ 38-532 applies only to public 20 employees.”
green
Ruggles v. Arizona, State of (2025)
(Doc. 19 ¶¶ 87-98.) Under A.R.S. § 38-532(A)(1), “[i]t is a prohibited personnel 11 practice for an employee who has control over personnel actions to take reprisal against an 12 employee for a disclosure of information of a matter of public concern by the employee to 13 a public body that the employee reasonably believes evidences . . . [a] violation of any 14 law.” See also Mullenaux v. Graham Cnty., 82 P.3d 362, 367 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004) 15 (recognizing that A.R.S. § 38-5…
green
Sagers v. Panchanathan (2021)
A court may award reasonable attorney fees to an employee or former 28 employee who prevails in an action pursuant to this section, but the award of attorney fees shall not exceed $10,000.”). 1 holding “a classified public employee must exhaust his or her administrative remedies 2 available under the system provided by §§ 11-351 through 11-356 before filing an action 3 in superior court under . . . § 38-532.” Mullenaux v. Graham Cnty., 82 P.3d 362, 368 (Ariz. 4 Ct. App. 2004…
green
Cullen v. Koty-Leavitt Insurance Agency, Inc. (2007)
Co., 129 Ariz. 165, 166-67 , 629 P.2d 1001, 1002-03 (App.1981) (“The test to be applied in resolving whether the complaint established that appellant is entitled to relief under any theory of law is whether the complaint, taken in the light most favorable to appellant, is sufficient to constitute a valid claim.”) (emphasis added); cf. Mullenaux v. Graham County, 207 Ariz. 1, ¶ 18 , 82 P.3d 362, 367 (App.2004) (“[0]ur courts have long held that ‘failure to make reference to a…
green
Austin v. Chandler (2015)
See Mullenaux v. Graham County, 207 Ariz. 1, 5, ¶ 14 , 82 P.3d 362, 366 (App. 2004).
green
Gorney v. Arizona Board of Regents (2014)
See Mullenaux v. Graham County, 207 Ariz. 1, 7 , 82 P.3d 362, 368 (App.2004) and Guertin v. Pinal County, 178 Ariz. 610, 612 , 875 P.2d 843, 845 (App.1994).
green
SEMPRE LTD. PARTNERSHIP v. Maricopa County (2010)
See, e.g., Mullenaux v. Graham County, 207 Ariz. 1, 5, ¶ 14 , 82 P.3d 362, 366 (App.2004); Hamilton v. State, 186 Ariz. 590, 593-94 , 925 P.2d 731, 734-35 (App.1996); Estate of Bohn v. Waddell, 174 Ariz. 239, 248-50 , 848 P.2d 324, 333-35 (App. 1992).
green
Martin v. Weed Incorporated (2019)
See Mullenaux v. Graham County, 82 P.3d 362, 366 (Ariz. App. 22 2004) (holding that use of “may” in statutory grievance procedure means an employee 23 5 During oral argument, defense counsel stated that it “doesn’t make sense” 24 that the Company should have to pay all compensation after it unilaterally terminates.