Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1919–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Green Acres Trust v. Londongreen2 sentences2022We look first to “whether a privileged occasion arose, and, if so, whether the occasion for the privilege was abused.” Id. 2017The jury will then determine “whether the occasion for the privilege was abused,” id., “unless only one conclusion can be drawn from the evidence,” Melton v. Slonsky, 19 Ariz. App. 65, 68 (1973) (citation omitted). | 2 | 6 |
Melton v. Slonskygreen2 sentences2017The jury will then determine “whether the occasion for the privilege was abused,” id., “unless only one conclusion can be drawn from the evidence,” Melton v. Slonsky, 19 Ariz. App. 65, 68 (1973) (citation omitted). 2016The jury will then determine “whether the occasion for the privilege was abused,” id., “unless only one conclusion can be drawn from the evidence,” Melton v. Slonsky, 19 Ariz. App. 65, 68 (1973) (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Lewis v. Olivergreen2 sentences2017The privilege can be abused “by excessive publication, by use of the occasion for an improper purpose, or by lack of belief or grounds for belief in the truth of what is said.” Id. ¶41 An abuse through excessive publication results from “publication to an unprivileged recipient not reasonably necessary to protect the interest upon which the privilege is grounded.” Lewis v. Oliver, 178 Ariz. 330, 335 (App. 1993). 2016The privilege can be abused “by excessive publication, by use of the occasion for an improper purpose, or by lack of belief or grounds for belief in the truth of what is said.” Id. ¶41 An abuse through excessive publication results from “publication to an unprivileged recipient not reasonably necessary to protect the interest upon which the privilege is grounded.” Lewis v. Oliver, 178 Ariz. 330, 335 (App. 1993). | 2 | 2 |
Sierra Madre Development, Inc. v. via Entrada Townhouses Ass'ngreen2 sentences1986However, we have previously held that the defense of immunity “may be properly raised in a motion to dismiss, if the facts establishing the occasion for the privilege 1 appear in the pleadings.” Green Acres Trust v. London, 141 Ariz. 609, 613 , 688 P.2d 617, 621 (1984) (footnote added); see also Sierra Madre Dev., Inc. v. Via Entrada Townhouses Ass’n, 20 Ariz.App. 550, 552 , 514 P.2d 503, 505 (1973); 2A J. 1986However, we have previously held that the defense of immunity “may be properly raised in a motion to dismiss, if the facts establishing the occasion for the privilege 1 appear in the pleadings.” Green Acres Trust v. London, 141 Ariz. 609, 613 , 688 P.2d 617, 621 (1984) (footnote added); see also Sierra Madre Dev., Inc. v. Via Entrada Townhouses Ass’n, 20 Ariz.App. 550, 552 , 514 P.2d 503, 505 (1973); 2A J. | 1 | 3 |
Drummond v. Stahlgreen2 sentences1984See Drummond v. Stahl, 127 Ariz. 122 , 618 P.2d 616 (App.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967 , 101 S.Ct. 1484 , 67 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). 1984See Drummond v. Stahl, 127 Ariz. 122 , 618 P.2d 616 (App.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967 , 101 S.Ct. 1484 , 67 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Castelli v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1984See Drummond v. Stahl, 127 Ariz. 122 , 618 P.2d 616 (App.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967 , 101 S.Ct. 1484 , 67 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Drummond v. Stahlgreen1 sentence1984See Drummond v. Stahl, 127 Ariz. 122 , 618 P.2d 616 (App.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967 , 101 S.Ct. 1484 , 67 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Mathews v. Hannahgreen1 sentence1984See Drummond v. Stahl, 127 Ariz. 122 , 618 P.2d 616 (App.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967 , 101 S.Ct. 1484 , 67 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Choissergreen2 sentences1968See Phoenix Newspapers v. Choisser, supra, 82 Ariz. at 277 , 312 P.2d at 154 ; Broking v. Phoenix Newspapers, 76 Ariz. at 340 , 264 P.2d at 416 . 1968See Phoenix Newspapers v. Choisser, supra, 82 Ariz. at 277 , 312 P.2d at 154 ; Broking v. Phoenix Newspapers, 76 Ariz. at 340 , 264 P.2d at 416 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Roscoe v. Schoolitz
green
2 sentences1984Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310 , 464 P.2d 333 (1970). 1984Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310 , 464 P.2d 333 (1970). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Broking v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc.
green
2 sentences1968See Phoenix Newspapers v. Choisser, supra, 82 Ariz. at 277 , 312 P.2d at 154 ; Broking v. Phoenix Newspapers, 76 Ariz. at 340 , 264 P.2d at 416 . 1968See Phoenix Newspapers v. Choisser, supra, 82 Ariz. at 277 , 312 P.2d at 154 ; Broking v. Phoenix Newspapers, 76 Ariz. at 340 , 264 P.2d at 416 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Neeb v. Hope
green
2 sentences1919The supreme court of Pennsylvania, in the case of Neeb v. Hope, 111 Pa. 145 , 2 Atl. 568 , says: “An occasion of privilege will not justify false and groundless imputations of wicked motives or of crime. 1919The supreme court of Pennsylvania, in the case of Neeb v. Hope, 111 Pa. 145 , 2 Atl. 568 , says: “An occasion of privilege will not justify false and groundless imputations of wicked motives or of crime. | 1 | 1919–1919 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.