Cluster 1249232

green · 27 citation events across 3 courts. Showing the 10 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Green 10

green Jane Doe I; Jane Doe II; And John Doe v. Lenzner Medical Services Llc... ... (2025)

Quote Authority · Ariz. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion

P. 56(e); see Mecham, 173 Ariz. at 478 (“A party cannot rely solely on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment.”). 6Herrod was deposed on two occasions by the Does, each for a different purpose.

“A party cannot rely solely on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment.”

green Zavaleta v. OTB Acquisition LLC (2021)

Rule Authority · D. Ariz.

See 19 Anderson, 477 U.S. at 247–48; State v. Mecham, 844 P.2d 641, 645 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). 20 Because Defendant presented clear and convincing evidence that Plaintiff was 21 discharged for nonretaliatory reasons, and Plaintiff did not present any evidence to dispute 22 those nonretaliatory reasons, Defendant has satisfied its burden in rebutting the 23 presumption of retaliation.

green Shafer v. McCombs (2018)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.

“A party cannot rely solely on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment.” State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 (App. 1992) (citing Brown Wholesale Elec.

citing Brown Wholesale Elec. Co. v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 135 Ariz. 154, 158 (App. 1982)

green Harris v. godaddy.com (2015)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.

Nor did Harris offer any evidence to support his assertion that he “was fired for having a copy of the [document].” See State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 , 844 P.2d 641, 645 (App. 1992) (noting a party cannot solely rely “on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment”). ¶11 Harris also argues GoDaddy presented no evidence of the written policy that he was terminated for violating.

noting a party cannot solely rely “on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment”

green Emerman v. Az Holding (2014)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App. · 3 citations in this opinion

The plaintiff cannot solely rely “on unsupported contentions that a dispute exists to create a factual issue that would defeat summary judgment.” State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 , 844 P.2d 641, 645 (App. 1992).

green Delbridge v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District (1994)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.

State v. Mecher, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 , 844 P.2d 641, 645 (App.1992).

green Delbridge v. SALT RIVER PROJECT AGR. IMP. (1994)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.

State v. Mecher, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 , 844 P.2d 641, 645 (App. 1992).

green Carroll v. Robinson (1994)

Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.

State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 478 , 844 P.2d 641, 645 (App.1992).

green In Re Shannon (1994)

Cited · Ariz. · signal: see · 4 citations in this opinion

See State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 485-86 , 844 P.2d 641, 652-53 (App. 1992) (awarding market rates and distinguishing Lacer v. Navajo County, 141 Ariz. 392 , 687 P.2d 400 (App. 1984), because fees awarded in Lacer were statutorily limited to "amount paid or agreed to be paid"); see also Schweiger v. China Doll Restaurant, Inc., 138 Ariz. 183, 187 , 673 P.2d 927, 931 (App. 1983) (stating in dicta that fees awarded to public sector attorneys should be measured by reasonable …

awarding market rates and distinguishing Lacer v. Navajo County, 141 Ariz. 392 , 687 P.2d 400 (App. 1984), because fees awarded in Lacer were statutorily limited to "amount paid or agreed to be paid"

green PNL Credit L.P. v. Southwest Pacific Investment, Inc. (1994)

Cited · Ariz. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion

See State v. Mecham, 173 Ariz. 474, 477 , 844 P.2d 641, 644 (App.1992).