 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Arizona Dep't of Revenue v. Dougherty, 1 CA-SA 99-0084,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, May 18, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Taxpayers could maintain a class action against taxing authority, but individual plaintiffs were required to exhaust administrative remedies on a case by case basis to recover.
|
|||||
| Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co. v. Barerra, Supreme Court No. CV-99-0388-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 18, 2000, Decided , May 18, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Graville v. Dodge, 1 CA-CV 99-0582,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, May 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court had discretion to order supervision for grandparent visitation; therefore, the court appointed doctor supervising compliance with visitation orders and providing therapeutic intervention was appropriate.
|
|||||
| In re Suspended Mbr. of the State Bar of Arizona, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-00-0042-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 23, 2000, Decided , May 23, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Sill, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-00-0026-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 24, 2000, Decided , May 24, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| City of Tucson v. Consumers for Retail Choice Sponsored by Wal-Mart, 2 CA-CV 00-0035,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, May 25, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City's referendum ordinances did not conflict with, and were not preempted by, state referendum statutes. Because political committee did not comply with city's ordinances, petition was insufficient to require an election.
|
|||||
| Lombardo v. Albu, Supreme Court No. CV-99-0316-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 25, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Approximately $ 50,000 in United States Currency, 2 CA-CV 98-0145,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, May 30, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court, in granting party's request for return of $ 50,000 in cash seized as proceeds of illegal drug activities, erred when it apparently found that state failed to timely initiate or pursue forfeiture proceedings.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
