 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Ring, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-97-0428-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0378-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0243-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0272-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0536-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0439-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0328-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0360-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0447-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0275-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0508-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0544-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0595-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0091-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0100-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0103-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0129-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0270-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-01-0421-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-02-0042-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-02-0044-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0296-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0551-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-99-0438-AP, Supreme Court No. CR-98-0289-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-98-0376-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-97-0317-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-98-0488-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-97-0349-AP, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-98-0278-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, August 28, 2002, Decided , August 28, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Bloxham v. Glock Inc., 2 CA-CV 2002-0012,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, August 29, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellees, gun manufacturer and gun show promoter, had no duty to control third party who used manufacturer's gun purchased from show to murder parents' children; thus, parents failed to allege facts justifying imposing a duty on appellees.
|
|||||
| McRae Invs. v. State, 1 CA-CV 01-0582,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, August 29, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State was not bound by the five-year limitations period in judgment renewal statutes or the requirement to renew the judgment, and the State was not, therefore, precluded from enforcing a judgment, even after the five-year period expired.
|
|||||
| Universal Mktg. & Entm't v. Bank One of Ariz., N.A., 1 CA-CV 01-0004,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, August 29, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A garnishor did not commit the tort of conversion by taking control of funds a corporation made into a depositor's unrestricted bank account; unprotected, the entire account debt became fair game for any creditor of the depositor.
|
|||||
| Blankenbaker v. Jonovich, 1 CA-CV 01-0379,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, September 3, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though a chiropractor did not perfect his lien against a patient, this did not affect the existence of the lien that arose by operation of law when the chiropractor treated the patient, who had been injured by a third party.
|
|||||
| In re Smith, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0121-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, September 3, 2002, Decided , September 3, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The imposed sanction of attorney censure for commingling personal funds with client funds would protect the public and deter similar conduct by other lawyers, and instill public confidence in the bar and the integrity of the legal system.
|
|||||
| Porter v. Triad of Ariz., L.P., 1 CA-CV 01-0216,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, September 3, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the minority tolling statute applied to the minors' wrongful death claims, the trial court erred in dismissing the claims as barred by the statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| State v. Benenati, 2 CA-CR 1999-0064,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, September 3, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court erred by failing to submit defendant's release status at the time he committed his drug offenses to the jury, his two-year sentence enhancement was vacated.
|
|||||
| In re Tucker, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0120-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, September 4, 2002, Decided , September 4, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was censured and placed on probation for one year, as attorney placed his own funds in trust account, failed to safeguard client funds, failed to reconcile trust account monthly, and failed to maintain trust account 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. |
