Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Drummond v. Stahl, 618 P.2d 616.

34 citing documents.

Mason v. City of Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Mason v. City of Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
¶ 14 (App. 2010) (noting that privilege applies to claims of false light invasion of privacy); Linder v. Brown & Herrick, 406 (App. 1997) (applying privilege to preclude claim of fraud arising from allegedly defamatory statements made by opposing counsel to court); –26 (App. 1980) (applying privilege to preclude claim of tortious interference with contract arising from allegedly defamatory statements in complaint to state bar); 565, 567 (App. 1980) (applying privilege to preclude claim of neglig
Flury v. MacDonald Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Flury v. MacDonald Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
“Defamatory statements contained in pleadings are absolutely privileged if they are connected with or have any bearing on or are related to the subject of inquiry.” (citations omitted).
Desert Palm Surgical Group, P.L.C. v. Petta 343 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Desert Palm Surgical Group, P.L.C. v. Petta 343 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See Advanced Cardiac Specialists, Chartered v. Tri-City Cardiology Consultants, P.C., ¶ 7, -26, -20 (App. 1980).
Advanced Cardiac Specialists, Chartered v. Tri-City Cardiology Consultants, P.C. 214 P.3d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Advanced Cardiac Specialists, Chartered v. Tri-City Cardiology Consultants, P.C. 214 P.3d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
See , (“Parties to judicial proceedings are generally granted an absolute privilege to use defamatory language in pleadings because of an ‘overriding public interest’ that persons should speak freely and fearlessly in litigation.”); Green Acres Trust, 141 Ariz. at 612-613 , 688 P.2d at 62
Ritchie v. Krasner 211 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Ritchie v. Krasner 211 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Ledvina v. Cerasani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Ledvina v. Cerasani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
¶8 Division One of this court held that an absolute rather than qualified privilege applied to statements made in a complaint to the State Bar of Arizona alleging unethical conduct by an attorney.
Sobol v. Marsh 130 P.3d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Marsh 130 P.3d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Alarcon 131 P.3d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Alarcon 131 P.3d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Safeway Ins. Co., Inc. v. Guerrero 83 P.3d 560 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Safeway Ins. Co., Inc. v. Guerrero 83 P.3d 560 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
B. ¶ 19 Roush, however, -26 , -20 (App.1980) and related eases that invoke the privilege afforded counsel in making defamatory statements during the course of judicial proceedings.
Ashton-Blair v. Merrill 928 P.2d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Ashton-Blair v. Merrill 928 P.2d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Lewis v. Oliver 873 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Lewis v. Oliver 873 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
In support, he cites: , (complaint made to quasi-judicial body [judicial commission established to inquire into conduct of judges] absolutely privileged); , cert.
City of Tucson v. Superior Court 809 P.2d 428 Ariz. 1991
City of Tucson v. Superior Court 809 P.2d 428 Ariz. 1991
nst defamation actions for communications to the Commission similar to the absolute privilege our court of appeals has already recognized for reports to the Commission on Judicial Conduct (formerly the Commission on Judicial Qualifications), , and for reports to the State Bar concerning the conduct of an attorney, , cert.
Western Technologies, Inc. v. Sverdrup & Parcel, Inc. 739 P.2d 1318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Western Technologies, Inc. v. Sverdrup & Parcel, Inc. 739 P.2d 1318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Franzi v. Koedyker 758 P.2d 1303 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Franzi v. Koedyker 758 P.2d 1303 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
In Arizona, for example, see Green Acres, supra; , , cert.
Green Acres Trust v. London 688 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1984
Green Acres Trust v. London 688 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1984
Green Acres Trust v. London 688 P.2d 658 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Green Acres Trust v. London 688 P.2d 658 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
149 , or in a complaint to the State Bar alleging unethical conduct on the part of an attorney
Bailey v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 636 P.2d 144 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Bailey v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 636 P.2d 144 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981