Legal Opinion

Mullenaux v. Graham County

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 6, 2004No. 2CA-CV 2003-0130PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BRAMMER, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Mark Mullenaux and his wife appeal from the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Graham County on Mark’s wrongful discharge, breach of contract, and defamation claims. On appeal, Mullenaux argues that his failure to raise his claims before the Graham County Merit Commission does not, as the trial court apparently concluded, preclude them. He also contends that a qualified privilege does not, as the court implicitly found, immunize the County from liability on his defamation claim. 1 We affirm.

Standard of Review

¶2 We determine de novo…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Orme School v. ReevesArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Darby v. CisnerosSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Bothell v. Two Point Acres, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  4. Gilbert v. Board of Medical ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
  5. Hawkins v. State, Dept. of Economic SEC.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1995

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. SEMPRE LTD. PARTNERSHIP v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  2. Gorney v. Arizona Board of RegentsDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2014
  3. Daniel Vargas v. MLEM Properties IncorporatedDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2026
  4. Martin v. Weed IncorporatedDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2019
  5. Puckett v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2023

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API