 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Danielson v. Evans, 2 CA-CV 00-0184,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, December 18, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court order that required husband to pay 35.7 percent of his combined military benefits did not impermissibly order him to pay that amount from disability pay. Failure to pay property settlement could not be basis for contempt order.
|
|||||
| Strojnik v. General Ins. Co. of Am., 1 CA-CV 00-0209,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, December 18, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The insurers did not improperly interfere with the clients' prospective Morris contract with the law firm because the insurers did not violate the spirit or holding of Morris, and did not impair any of the clients' rights.
|
|||||
| Carrasco v. State, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-01-0140-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, December 19, 2001, Decided , December 19, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re An Inactive, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-01-0170-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, December 19, 2001, Decided , December 19, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re An Inactive, Supreme Court No. SB-01-0169-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, December 19, 2001, Decided , December 19, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Sparks, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-01-0155-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, December 19, 2001, Decided , December 19, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Calderon-Palomino v. Nichols, 2 CA-SA 01-0107,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, December 20, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where accused did not identify how translation of discovery documents would have assisted his defense, or that he would be erroneously deprived of participating in defense, request for translations was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Kremser v. Quarles & Brady, L.L.P., 1 CA-CV 00-0535,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, December 20, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorneys, who represented company purchasing assets of another corporation, negligently prepared certain finance documents required to perfect sellers' security interests, owed a duty to sellers, even though they were nonclients.
|
|||||
| Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of Tucson, 2 CA-CV 00-0219,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, December 20, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court had no jurisdiction where plaintiff corporation failed to exhaust administrative remedies in zoning case by failing to seek recourse from board of adjustment, which was agency with primary jurisdiction for contesting zoning decisions.
|
|||||
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. |
