Professional Documents
Culture Documents
UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT
PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
IN THE
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which
Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge John C. Gemmill joined.
C A T T A N I, Judge:
1
Sharon and LeRoy Visor appeal the superior courts
continuation of four injunctions against harassment obtained against them
by Geoffrey Streeter and Dr. Matthew Hansen. For reasons that follow, we
vacate the injunctions as impermissible prior restraints of protected speech.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
2
Hansen, aided by physicians assistant Streeter, performed
shoulder replacement surgery on LeRoy Visor. LeRoy Visor continued to
see Hansen for follow-up care for several months after the surgery, during
which he claims he suffered increasing pain. LeRoy Visor then underwent
revision surgery with another surgeon.
3
Following the revision surgery, the Visors wrote Hansen and
Streeter alleging medical malpractice and demanding compensation for
LeRoy Visors alleged injuries. The Visors also stated that, if their
compensation demand was not met, they would commence with legal
action, filing a complaint with the medical board and alert various media
sources of this malpractice.
4
After sending their demand letter, the Visors prepared two
flyers titled Malpractice Alert and Medical Negligence Awareness.
Both flyers stated detailed allegations against Hansen and Streeter
regarding LeRoy Visors care and treatment. The Visors sent flyers to
Hansens and Streeters homes and places of business, as well as to
Streeters neighbors and parents. Sharon Visor also handed flyers to people
visiting Hansens and Streeters offices and placed flyers on vehicles in the
parking lot.
5
Both Hansen and Streeter thereafter obtained injunctions
against harassment against each of the Visors. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. (A.R.S.)
:ama