15 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1936–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Brenda D. v. Department of Child Safetygreen1 sentence2017We further held: “[S]hould a parent appear before the close of the hearing, such parent’s due process rights cannot be violated by restricting the parent’s participation. . . . [O]nly if a parent has failed to appear by the time both parties have fully presented their case, may the court treat the parent’s absence as a waiver of the parent’s legal rights and deem the parent to have admitted the well-pled factual allegations of the petition.” Id. at 156, ¶ 18 . ¶8 Here, as in Brenda D., Mother and Father’s participation in the termination proceedings was imperfect—they attempted to appear telep | 1 | 1 |
Manuel M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Securitygreen1 sentence2017See Manuel M., 218 Ariz, at 214, ¶¶ 28-31, 181 P.3d 1126 . | 1 | 1 |
Carousel Snack Bar v. Industrial Commissiongreen1 sentence2017Comm’n, 156 Ariz. 43, 46 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cidgreen2 sentences2016State v. Cid, 181 Ariz. 496 , 7 STATE v. WALKER Decision of the Court 500, 892 P.2d 216, 220 (App. 1995) (credibility of the evidence and its weight, if any, are matters for the jury to decide).2 ¶20 The State also argues the error was harmless because provocation manslaughter should apply only when a defendant “catches” a spouse in an adulterous relationship. 2016State v. Cid, 181 Ariz. 496 , 7 STATE v. WALKER Decision of the Court 500, 892 P.2d 216, 220 (App. 1995) (credibility of the evidence and its weight, if any, are matters for the jury to decide).2 ¶20 The State also argues the error was harmless because provocation manslaughter should apply only when a defendant “catches” a spouse in an adulterous relationship. | 1 | 1 |
Quigley v. City Court of the City of Tucsongreen1 sentence2016Sec., 210 Ariz. 77 , 83, ¶ 19 (App. 2005) (quoting Quigley v. Tucson City Court, 132 Ariz. 35, 37 (1982)). ¶10 Kelly argues that she had good cause for failing to appear at the pretrial conference because (1) she attended all previous hearings, (2) she telephoned her counsel at the close of the hearing to retrieve the telephone number to call for the hearing, (3) she was not endorsed on the minute entry from the initial hearing, and (4) the minute entry does not reflect that Kelly was given a Form 3 by the juvenile court.5 ¶11 If a court finds that a parent or guardian failed to appear at a te | 1 | 1 |
State v. Davisgreen1 sentence2015State v. Garcia, 235 Ariz. 627, ¶ 7 , 334 P.3d 1286, 1289 (App.2014); see also State v. Davis, 137 Ariz. 551, 562 , 672 P.2d 480 , 491 (App. 1983) (because "current definitions of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and child molesting are identical to the former definitions of those crimes, ... | 1 | 1 |
State v. Davisgreen1 sentence2015State v. Garcia, 235 Ariz. 627, ¶ 7 , 334 P.3d 1286, 1289 (App.2014); see also State v. Davis, 137 Ariz. 551, 562 , 672 P.2d 480 , 491 (App. 1983) (because "current definitions of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and child molesting are identical to the former definitions of those crimes, ... | 1 | 1 |
State v. Garciagreen2 sentences2015State v. Garcia, 235 Ariz. 627, ¶ 7 , 334 P.3d 1286, 1289 (App.2014); see also State v. Davis, 137 Ariz. 551, 562 , 672 P.2d 480 , 491 (App. 1983) (because "current definitions of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and child molesting are identical to the former definitions of those crimes, ... 2015State v. Garcia, 235 Ariz. 627, ¶ 7 , 334 P.3d 1286, 1289 (App.2014); see also State v. Davis, 137 Ariz. 551, 562 , 672 P.2d 480 , 491 (App. 1983) (because "current definitions of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and child molesting are identical to the former definitions of those crimes, ... | 1 | 1 |
Cockerham v. Zikratchgreen2 sentences1982There are many cases in the reports where courts have used the word ‘void,’ where a close analysis of the facts shows that ‘voidable’ is what is really meant, and there have been instances where appellate tribunals have used the word ‘jurisdiction’ when, in reality, they meant, not the power to perform a certain act, but the performing of it when it was prohibited, a very different thing.” (Emphasis in original). 48 Ariz. at 392-93 , 62 P.2d at 137 ; accord, Cockerham v. Zikratch, 127 Ariz. 230 , 619 P.2d 739 (1980); see Arizona Public Service Co. v. Southern Union Gas Co., supra. In summary o 1982There are many cases in the reports where courts have used the word ‘void,’ where a close analysis of the facts shows that ‘voidable’ is what is really meant, and there have been instances where appellate tribunals have used the word ‘jurisdiction’ when, in reality, they meant, not the power to perform a certain act, but the performing of it when it was prohibited, a very different thing.” (Emphasis in original). 48 Ariz. at 392-93 , 62 P.2d at 137 ; accord, Cockerham v. Zikratch, 127 Ariz. 230 , 619 P.2d 739 (1980); see Arizona Public Service Co. v. Southern Union Gas Co., supra. In summary o | 1 | 1 |
Ross v. Industrial Commissiongreen2 sentences1977It is based upon the assumption, as stated in Ross v. Industrial Commission, 82 Ariz. 9, 11-12 , 307 P.2d 612, 614 (1957), that the “administrative agency, if given a complete chance to pass upon the matter, will decide correctly.” Our rule that we will not consider on review issues not raised at all before the Commission must be contrasted with the failure of the losing party to raise specific issues on a Request for Review of the decision or award entered after the close of the hearing. 1977It is based upon the assumption, as stated in Ross v. Industrial Commission, 82 Ariz. 9, 11-12 , 307 P.2d 612, 614 (1957), that the “administrative agency, if given a complete chance to pass upon the matter, will decide correctly.” Our rule that we will not consider on review issues not raised at all before the Commission must be contrasted with the failure of the losing party to raise specific issues on a Request for Review of the decision or award entered after the close of the hearing. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Collins v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences1982There are many cases in the reports where courts have used the word ‘void,’ where a close analysis of the facts shows that ‘voidable’ is what is really meant, and there have been instances where appellate tribunals have used the word ‘jurisdiction’ when, in reality, they meant, not the power to perform a certain act, but the performing of it when it was prohibited, a very different thing.” (Emphasis in original). 48 Ariz. at 392-93 , 62 P.2d at 137 ; accord, Cockerham v. Zikratch, 127 Ariz. 230 , 619 P.2d 739 (1980); see Arizona Public Service Co. v. Southern Union Gas Co., supra. In summary o 1982There are many cases in the reports where courts have used the word ‘void,’ where a close analysis of the facts shows that ‘voidable’ is what is really meant, and there have been instances where appellate tribunals have used the word ‘jurisdiction’ when, in reality, they meant, not the power to perform a certain act, but the performing of it when it was prohibited, a very different thing.” (Emphasis in original). 48 Ariz. at 392-93 , 62 P.2d at 137 ; accord, Cockerham v. Zikratch, 127 Ariz. 230 , 619 P.2d 739 (1980); see Arizona Public Service Co. v. Southern Union Gas Co., supra. In summary o | 2 | 1980–1982 |
Gordon v. Liguori
green
1 sentence2018In its severance order, the court found that the parents’ testimony would have aided the court in understanding the efforts the parents took to overcome their substance dependency and to better care for the children.7 In the absence severance, we need not address claims pertaining to the other grounds.” (citation omitted)). 7 On appeal Father argues only that (1) the juvenile court misapplied Melissa W. because the court did not notify him, prior to the close of the hearing, as to what evidence the court was lacking; and (2) because the court failed to properly apply the three-part test adopte | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Lashonda M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
green
1 sentence2016Sec., 210 Ariz. 77 , 83, ¶ 19 (App. 2005) (quoting Quigley v. Tucson City Court, 132 Ariz. 35, 37 (1982)). ¶10 Kelly argues that she had good cause for failing to appear at the pretrial conference because (1) she attended all previous hearings, (2) she telephoned her counsel at the close of the hearing to retrieve the telephone number to call for the hearing, (3) she was not endorsed on the minute entry from the initial hearing, and (4) the minute entry does not reflect that Kelly was given a Form 3 by the juvenile court.5 ¶11 If a court finds that a parent or guardian failed to appear at a te | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Mother Tucker's Food Experience & Insurance v. Industrial Commission
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 500 , 690 P.2d at 801 . 2014Id. at 500 , 690 P.2d at 801 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Young v. Environmental Air Products, Inc.
green
2 sentences1992As the supreme court observed in Young v. Environmental Air Products, 136 Ariz. 158 , 160 n. 1, 665 P.2d 40 , 42 n. 1 (1983), a statutory employer is one who is “compelled by law to pay workmen’s compensation benefits to remote employees—i.e., employees of another.” See A.R.S. § 23-902(B). 1992As the supreme court observed in Young v. Environmental Air Products, 136 Ariz. 158 , 160 n. 1, 665 P.2d 40 , 42 n. 1 (1983), a statutory employer is one who is “compelled by law to pay workmen’s compensation benefits to remote employees—i.e., employees of another.” See A.R.S. § 23-902(B). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Rockwell International Credit Corp. v. Valley Bank
green
2 sentences1987The Court of Appeals of Idaho, in Rockwell International Credit Corp. v. Valley Bank, 109 Idaho 406 , 707 P.2d 517 (1985), arrived at a different conclusion by a close analysis of the language of a statute that can be read several ways. 1987The Court of Appeals of Idaho, in Rockwell International Credit Corp. v. Valley Bank, 109 Idaho 406 , 707 P.2d 517 (1985), arrived at a different conclusion by a close analysis of the language of a statute that can be read several ways. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
United States v. Wade
green
2 sentences1970At the close of the hearing, the trial judge concluded that the defendants were adequately represented by counsel at the lineup, United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967), and that the circumstances of the lineup were not unduly suggestive. 1970At the close of the hearing, the trial judge concluded that the defendants were adequately represented by counsel at the lineup, United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967), and that the circumstances of the lineup were not unduly suggestive. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Harper v. Tipple
green
2 sentences1936Harper v. Tipple, 21 Ariz. 41 , 184 Pac. 1005 .” Pursuant to the findings and conclusions the court rendered a decree granting the petitioner the care, custody and control of the children and directing the respondents to deliver them to her immediately upon receipt of the judgment. 1936Harper v. Tipple, 21 Ariz. 41 , 184 Pac. 1005 .” Pursuant to the findings and conclusions the court rendered a decree granting the petitioner the care, custody and control of the children and directing the respondents to deliver them to her immediately upon receipt of the judgment. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.