Bainhauer v. Manoukian

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding “common law strict liability has been replaced by, at the least, a negligence standard of fault” and that the distinction between media and nonmedia defendants is irrelevant to the analysis
• mentioning the conditional privilege afforded to physicians involved in hospital peer review but resolving the underlying lawsuit on other grounds
• applying the privilege where a physician reported to other surgeons that a colleague had caused the death of a patient, because the parties shared a common interest in matters “affecting the quality of health care”
• recognizing occasional privilege in defamation case
• “Proof or failure of proof of the operative facts of the defamation count would, therefore, completely comprehend the malicious interference cause. Thus, if no abuse of privilege is found, then the ‘malicious’ predicate of the interference count would also fail.”
• “Proof or failure of proof of the operative facts of the defamation count would, therefore, completely comprehend the malicious interference cause. Thus, if no abuse of privilege is found, then the ‘malicious' predicate of the interference count would also fail.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).