In Matter of Marquardt, 821 P.2d 161 (Ariz. 1991).

In Matter of Marquardt, 821 P.2d 161 (Ariz. 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite

green Positive treatment Quoted verbatim 6× 40.6 score

G Cite

cited 10× by 5 distinct cases, 2002–2012 · …the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant. at p. 164 ⚠ not in text

187 citation events (73 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.

Strongest positive: Claudia Patricia Higuera v. State of Arizona (arizctapp, 2016-10-07)

Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of

1991 2008 2026

Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Claudia Patricia Higuera v. State of Arizona (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Madison v. Groseth (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2012 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Blevins v. Government Employees Insurance (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2011 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Blevins v. Government Employees Ins. Co. (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2011 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) King v. Titsworth (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: see · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.

examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Haas v. Colosi (2×) also: Cited as authority (quoted)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high

the court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Pope v. Phoenix

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium

That is, the final-judgment rule now codified in § 12-2101(A)(1) still provides the substantive right to appeal from a final tax court judgment, see Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 502 (1991) (citing prior codification of A.R.S. § 12-2101(A)(1)), and § 12-170(C) simply “confirms that the procedures for appealing final judgments under A.R.S. § 12-2101[(A)(1)] also apply to judgments entered by the tax court,” Devenir, 169 Ariz. at 503 (quoting People of Faith v. Ariz. Dep’t of Revenue, 164 Ariz. 102, 105 (App. 1990)). ¶9 The City relies on the Devenir court’s obs…

cited Cited as authority (rule) Courtney v. Hon. foster/courtney

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2014 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phx., 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); Fragoso v. Fell, 210 Ariz. 427, 430, ¶ 7 , 111 P.3d 1027, 1030 (App.2005).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) State of Arizona v. Louis John Felix

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2014 · confidence medium

Each part of a statute must be given meaning so that no part is rendered “superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.” Devenir As socs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Balestrieri v. Balestrieri

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991). ¶ 4 Rule 54(g)(1) states that a request for attorney’s fees “shall be made in the plead ings.” Under Rule 7(a), a “pleading” means only a complaint, an answer, a reply to a counterclaim, an answer to a cross-claim, a third-party complaint and an answer to a third-party complaint.

examined Cited as authority (rule) Lund v. Myers (3×) also: Cited "see"

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium

Bypassing these two restrictions would also run counter to Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 26(g), which prohibits the trial court from considering or scheduling “[any] discovery motion” unless moving counsel has attached a statement showing good faith efforts to resolve the dispute. 12 See Devenir, 169 Ariz. at 503 , 821 P.2d at 164 (explaining that courts construe rules in the context of other rules governing the same subject matter and strive to find consistency). ¶ 27 Accordingly, considering Rule 26.1(f)(2) in its entirety and in relation to Rule 26(g), together with the goal of prese…

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Town of Marana v. Pima County

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium

When construing a statute, we “must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.” Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ruiz v. Lopez

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991). ¶ 13 To begin, the word “whereabouts” is defined as “the place or general locality where a person or thing is.” Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 1342 (1988).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Andrew R. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium

Also, "[t]he court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory or insignificant." Devenir Assoc. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Scottsdale Insurance v. Cendejas

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Merlina v. Jejna

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Hoggatt

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium

Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 504 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (finding that every part of a statute is to be given meaning so that no part is rendered “superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant”).

cited Cited as authority (rule) US West Communications, Inc. v. City of Tucson

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium

Comm’n, 181 Ariz. 119, 121 , 888 P.2d 777, 779 (1995); Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Estancia Development Associates, L.L.C. v. City of Scottsdale

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1999 · confidence medium

See Zamora v. Reinstein, 185 Ariz. 272, 275 , 915 P.2d 1227, 1230 (1996); Mail Boxes, Etc. v. Industrial Comm’n, 181 Ariz. 119, 121 , 888 P.2d 777, 779 (1995); Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991). ¶ 11 Although the statute’s language is the best and most reliable index of the statute’s meaning and must be consulted first, see Calmat of Arizona v. State ex rel.

cited Cited as authority (rule) U.S. West Communications, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); Calvert v. Farmers Ins.

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wersch v. Radnor/Landgrant

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium

Owens v. City of Phoenix, 180 Ariz. 402, 405 , 884 P.2d 1100, 1103 (App.1994); see Wyatt v. Wehmueller, 167 Ariz. 281, 284 , 806 P.2d 870, 873 (1991) (construing the meaning of a state statute); Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (interpreting court rules using the same principles of construction as statutes).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Juvenile in Mohave County Juvenile Court v. Superior Court (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium

To do so, we look to the rule's "context, language, effects and consequences, spirit and purpose." Devenir Assoc. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Cutter Aviation, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Dugan v. Fujitsu Business Communications Systems, Inc.

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium

Devenir Assoc. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Superior Court

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1996 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) No Insurance Section/Special Fund Division v. Industrial Commission (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1996 · confidence medium

Co. v. Industrial Comm'n, 182 Ariz. 405, 408 , 897 P.2d 707, 710 (App. 1995) (court must give meaning to each clause and word so as to avoid rendering any part of the statute superfluous) ( citing Devenir Assoc. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991)).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Tarango (2×)

Ariz. · 1996 · confidence medium

Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); Arnold v. Arizona Dept. of Health Servs., 160 Ariz. 593, 603 , 775 P.2d 521, 531 (1989); State v. Superior Court (Kerr-McGee Corp.), 113 Ariz. 248, 249 , 550 P.2d 626, 627 (1976).

cited Cited as authority (rule) Pfeil v. Smith

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium

Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) State Ex Rel. Udall v. Superior Court (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium

Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium

Therefore, we “must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute ... to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant.” Devenir Assoc. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (citation omitted).

discussed Cited as authority (rule) U.S. Xpress, Inc. v. Arizona Tax Court

Ariz. Ct. App. · 1994 · confidence medium

Although this distinction, like the tax court’s, is not apparent on the face of § 28-1599.11, it emerges, unlike the tax court’s, from close reading of surrounding statutory text—particularly the text of § 28-1599.10. *366 “If a statute’s words do not disclose legislative intent, the court must read the statute as a whole and give meaningful interpretation to all its provisions.” Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited "see" City of Phoenix v. Orbitz Worldwide

Ariz. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 (1991) (“The court must, if possible, give meaning to each clause and word in the statute or rule to 6 Section 542(b) mirrors its state tax code counterpart, A.R.S. § 42-2078. 15 CITY OF PHOENIX ET AL V.

discussed Cited "see" Gric v. Dcs

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 13 At the December 9, 2015 evidentiary hearing, DCS argued that neither the GAL nor the foster parents had standing to object to the motion to transfer jurisdiction.

discussed Cited "see" Gila River Indian Community v. Department of Child Safety (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high

discussed Cited "see" Munger Chadwick, P.L.C. v. Farwest Development & Construction of the Southwest, LLC (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (court rules must be interpreted “to avoid rendering anything superfluous, void, contradictory, or insignificant”). ¶ 9 The rules governing attorney conduct also contemplate law firms representing clients.

discussed Cited "see" Potter v. Vanderpool (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (if plain language of rule, like plain language of statute, does not disclose supreme court or legislature's intent, court "may look at the rule or statute’s context, language, effects and consequences, spirit and purpose" to determine meaning).

discussed Cited "see" Carol Ann Potter Debra Joy Merryman v. State of Arizona (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991) (if plain language of rule, like plain language of statute, does not disclose supreme court or legislature‟s intent, court “may look at the rule or statute‟s context, language, effects and consequences, spirit and purpose” to determine meaning).

discussed Cited "see" Hormel v. Maricopa County (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); State v. Garza Rodriguez, 164 Ariz. 107, 112 , 791 P.2d 633, 638 (1990); State v. Johnson, 171 Ariz. 39, 42 , 827 P.2d 1134, 1137 (App.1992). ¶ 21 In this case, the County’s argument, and the ultimate ruling by the tax court, would be entirely appropriate had the County at the scheduled meeting disputed the claim being advanced by Taxpayer.

discussed Cited "see" State v. Arizona Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); Garza Rodriguez, 164 Ariz. at 112 , 791 P.2d at 638 ; State v. Johnson, 171 Ariz. 39, 42 , 827 P.2d 1134, 1137 (App.1992). ¶ 25 Giving meaning, as we must, to all words within the phrase “ordinary and natural condition,” we conclude that the River must be evaluated in both its “ordinary” and “natural” condition.

discussed Cited "see" Chronis v. Steinle (2×)

Ariz. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991).

discussed Cited "see" Haywood Securities, Inc. v. Ehrlich (2×)

Ariz. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 504 , 821 P.2d 161, 165 (1991) (holding that a document entitled “OPINION” was not final and appealable because the superior court judge did not intend it to be); Focal Point, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 149 Ariz. 128, 129 , 717 P.2d 432, 433 (1986) (finding minute entry a valid judgment because the trial court signed the *117 written minute entry order and titled it “JUDGMENT,” demonstrating the intent that the order serve as an appealable judgment). ¶ 15 The phrase “signed by a judge” as used in Rule 58(a) therefore encompasse…

discussed Cited "see" Vega v. Sullivan (2×)

Ariz. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high

See Devenir Associates v. City of Phoenix, 169 Ariz. 500, 503 , 821 P.2d 161, 164 (1991); State v. Baca, 187 Ariz. 61, 63 , 926 P.2d 528, 530 (App.1996).

discussed Cited "see" Kabuto International Phoenix, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue (2×)