Mack v. Hughes

23 F. App'x 808
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 19, 2001·No. No. 00-15593; D.C. No. CV-99-00204-ACM·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Mack (“Mack”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees. Arizona’s general defamation rule provides that a defamation action accrues and the statute of limitations begins to run upon publication. Boatman v. Samaritan Health Services, Inc., 168 Ariz. 207, 812 P.2d 1025, 1031 (1990). Arizona applies the discovery rule if “the alleged defamatory statements are published under circumstances in which they are likely to be kept secret from the injured party for a considerable time.” Clark v. Airesearch Mfg. Co. of Ariz., Inc., 138 Ariz. 240, 673 P.2d 984, 986 (1983). Mack has failed to raise genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the allegedly defamatory statements were made in a secretive or confidential manner. Accordingly, Arizona’s discovery rule does not apply, and the district court properly granted Appellees’ motion for summary judgment. Navellier v. Sletten, 262 F.3d 923, 941 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mack v. Hughes, 23 F. App'x 808 (9th Cir. 2001).

23 F. App'x 808 (Mack v. Hughes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Clark v. Airesearch Manufacturing Co. of Arizona, Inc.
673 P.2d 984 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1983)
Boatman v. Samaritan Health Services, Inc.
812 P.2d 1025 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1990)
Navellier v. Sletten
262 F.3d 923 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)