From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...
Chamberlain v. Mathis
Arizona Supreme Court
729 P.2d 905 (1986)
Facts
The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) employed William Chamberlain, Wilda Dearie, Sue Ann Gundy, Arthur Reeves, and Michael Savino (ADHS employees) (plaintiffs). The ADHS employees performed an audit of an administrator contract. ADHS director Donald Mathis (defendant) publicly criticized the audit and made negative remarks about the ADHS employees, which included calling the ADHS employees incompetent and unqualified. These remarks were published in the newspaper the Arizona Republic. The ADHS employees brought a defamation action against Mathis. The trial court dismissed the claim, holding that Mathis enjoyed absolute immunity as an executive official. The ADHS employees appealed. The appellate court reversed, holding that Mathis’s immunity posed a fact question. Mathis appealed. The Arizona Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Feldman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
