 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Andrew G. v. Peasley-Fimbres, 2 CA-SA 2007-0054,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, August 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A juvenile court's order extending a delinquent juvenile's probation period based solely on the filing of a new delinquency petition was vacated where the probationary period the court sought to modify by extending its duration had already expired and the issue of modification had not been timely placed before it through any procedural mechanism.
|
|||||
| Kromko v. Ariz. Bd. of Regents, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-07-0018-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, August 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A claim that a tuition increase violated Ariz. Const. art. XI, § 6, was a nonjusticiable political question as neither the cases interpreting it nor the statutes authorizing the Board of Regents to adopt annual university operating budgets established judicially discoverable and manageable standards to determine when tuition was excessive.
|
|||||
| McDowell Mt. Ranch Cmty. Ass'n v. Simons, 1 CA-CV 05-0296,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, August 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's award of partial attorney's fees to a homeowners association on its action to enforce a covenant declaration was remanded where it cut the fees in half without explanation, suggesting that it improperly believed that the association, rather than the homeowner, bore the burden of establishing the reasonableness of the incurred fees.
|
|||||
| State v. Velazquez, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-04-0361-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, August 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A "previously convicted of a serious offense" aggravator was properly imposed under former Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-703(G)(2) on a capital defendant convicted of physically abusing two toddlers, causing one's death, because defendant confessed to abusing the surviving sister prior to and separately from killing her younger sister.
|
|||||
| Tierra Ranchos Homeowners Ass'n v. Kitchukov, 1 CA-CV 06-0474,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, August 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A grant of summary judgment in favor of the property owners, finding that the homeowners' association acted unreasonably in refusing to approve the location of a detached garage built by the owners was improper, in part because the visual impact of the owners' garage in its present location on other association members was a disputed fact.
|
|||||
| Banner Health v. Med. Sav. Ins. Co., 1 CA-CV 05-0432,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, August 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patients complained of a hospital's pricing, arguing that a definite price term was missing from a contract that the patients signed with the hospital; however, contract was not missing price term because prices were set in accordance with Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 36-436 to -436.03, and these statutes were incorporated into the contracts.
|
|||||
| Bohreer v. Erie Ins. Exch., 1 CA-CV 06-0277,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, August 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A contract case against a foreign insurer should not have been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the appointment of a director for service under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 20-221(A) amounted to a waiver of personal jurisdiction, despite the fact that the insurer had ceased doing business in Arizona.
|
|||||
| Save Our Valley Ass'n v. Ariz. Corp. Comm'n, 1 CA-CV 06-0248,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, August 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment on the pleading was affirmed because the association was precluded from bringing the action in superior court, when the association did not comply with the statutory prerequisite for judicial review by failing to file an application for rehearing with the Arizona Corporation Commission under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-253.
|
|||||
| W. Valley View, Inc. v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, 1 CA-CV 06-0549,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, August 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Newspaper was entitled to prospective relief on its request for future press releases from sheriff's office under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 39-121.01 because statute did not require submission of separate requests for copies of each successive record when what requester wanted was every record within clearly articulated and defined category of records.
|
|||||
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. |
