Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
C

Chamberlain v. Mathis

729 P.2d 905 (1986)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

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…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms