Legal Opinion · Dissent

DeNardo v. Bax

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided October 27, 2006No. S-11487, S-11508Published

1DissentEastaugh, Justice

Introduction. I respectfully dissent. The court affirms Bax's summary judgment because it concludes that DeNardo did not demonstrate the presence of a genuine issue of material fact about whether Bax abused the conditional privilege that attached to the statements she made to coworkers.1 I agree that Bax made out a prima facie showing that her statements were conditionally privileged because they ostensibly addressed workplace or (perhaps) mutual safety.2 But this simply means that we must decide whether, as DeNardo argued below and argues here, there are genuine factual disputes about…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Luther Haynes and Dorothy Haynes v. Alfred A. Knopf, Incorporated, and Nicholas LemannCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
  5. Moffatt v. BrownAlaska Supreme Court · 1988

15 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