corollary rule in Arizona

15 Arizona opinions name it 3 courts 1956–2018 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.

Followed or applied (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
Derendal v. Griffithgreen ariz · 2005 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 1 sentence 2018See Derendal, 209 Ariz. at 419, ¶ 9 (“[O]ur constitution requires that the state guarantee a right to jury trial for any defendant charged with an offense for which a jury trial was granted prior to statehood.”).	1	1
In Re Marriage of Fonggreen arizctapp · 1978 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 2 sentences 2015As a corollary to this principle, the community is generally “entitled to the profits and gains attributable to community assets.” In re Marriage of Fong, 121 Ariz. 298, 305 , 589 P.2d 1330, 1337 (App. 1978). 2015As a corollary to this principle, the community is generally “entitled to the profits and gains attributable to community assets.” In re Marriage of Fong, 121 Ariz. 298, 305 , 589 P.2d 1330, 1337 (App. 1978).	1	1
United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.green scotus · 1940 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985This argument of “waiver by conduct” was answered in United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 309 U.S. 506, 513 , 60 S.Ct. 653, 657 , 84 L.Ed. 894, 899 (1940): It is a corollary to immunity from suit on the part of the United States and the Indian Nations in tutelege that this immunity cannot be waived by officials. 1985This argument of “waiver by conduct” was answered in United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 309 U.S. 506, 513 , 60 S.Ct. 653, 657 , 84 L.Ed. 894, 899 (1940): It is a corollary to immunity from suit on the part of the United States and the Indian Nations in tutelege that this immunity cannot be waived by officials.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (20)

Case	Cited	Years
Stine v. Stine green arizctapp · 1994 2 sentences 2007Zale, 193 Ariz. 246, ¶ 17 , 972 P.2d at 234 ; Stine, 179 Ariz. at 388 , 880 P.2d at 145 . ¶ 13 Under Cohen’s and the trial court’s literal construction of the phrase “for 67 whatever price on whatever terms,” the decree would grant Cohen the discretion to sell the residence at any price, including “for a dime,” a point Cohen readily conceded during oral argument. 2007Zale, 193 Ariz. 246, ¶ 17 , 972 P.2d at 234 ; Stine, 179 Ariz. at 388 , 880 P.2d at 145 . ¶ 13 Under Cohen’s and the trial court’s literal construction of the phrase “for 67 whatever price on whatever terms,” the decree would grant Cohen the discretion to sell the residence at any price, including “for a dime,” a point Cohen readily conceded during oral argument.	2	2007–2007
In Re the Marriage of Zale green ariz · 1999 2 sentences 2007Zale, 193 Ariz. 246, ¶ 17 , 972 P.2d at 234 ; Stine, 179 Ariz. at 388 , 880 P.2d at 145 . ¶ 13 Under Cohen’s and the trial court’s literal construction of the phrase “for 67 whatever price on whatever terms,” the decree would grant Cohen the discretion to sell the residence at any price, including “for a dime,” a point Cohen readily conceded during oral argument. 2007Zale, 193 Ariz. 246, ¶ 17 , 972 P.2d at 234 ; Stine, 179 Ariz. at 388 , 880 P.2d at 145 . ¶ 13 Under Cohen’s and the trial court’s literal construction of the phrase “for 67 whatever price on whatever terms,” the decree would grant Cohen the discretion to sell the residence at any price, including “for a dime,” a point Cohen readily conceded during oral argument.	2	2007–2007
Chandler Medical Building Partners v. Chandler Dental Group green arizctapp · 1993 1 sentence 2008A corollary rule prohibits us from construing "one provision in a contract so as to render another provision meaningless.” Chandler Med., 175 Ariz. at 277 , 855 P.2d at 791 .	1	2008–2008
State v. Malloy green ariz · 1981 1 sentence 1997State v. Malloy, 131 Ariz. 125, 129 , 639 P.2d *283 315, 319 (1981).	1	1997–1997
M'culloch v. State of Maryland green · 1819 2 sentences 1990This immunity was established as a corollary of the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, a doctrine first advanced in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 , 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819). 1990This immunity was established as a corollary of the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, a doctrine first advanced in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 , 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819).	1	1990–1990
Helvering v. Gerhardt green scotus · 1938 2 sentences 1990The tax immunity enjoyed by state and federal employees met its virtual demise in the late 1930's with decisions in Helvering v. Gerhardt, 304 U.S. 405 , 58 S.Ct. 969 , 82 L.Ed. 1427 (1938), and Graves v. New York ex rel. 1990The tax immunity enjoyed by state and federal employees met its virtual demise in the late 1930's with decisions in Helvering v. Gerhardt, 304 U.S. 405 , 58 S.Ct. 969 , 82 L.Ed. 1427 (1938), and Graves v. New York ex rel.	1	1990–1990
Brown v. Ohio green scotus · 1977 2 sentences 1981Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 169 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2227 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977). 1981Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 169 , 97 S.Ct. 2221, 2227 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977).	1	1981–1981
Kintner v. Wolfe green ariz · 1967 2 sentences 1976Kintner v. Wolfe, 102 Ariz. 164 , 426 P.2d 798 (1967). 1976Kintner v. Wolfe, 102 Ariz. 164 , 426 P.2d 798 (1967).	1	1976–1976
Brady v. Black Mountain Investment Co. green ariz · 1969 2 sentences 1974Brady v. Black Mountain Investment Co., 105 Ariz. 87 , 459 P.2d 712 (1969). 1974Brady v. Black Mountain Investment Co., 105 Ariz. 87 , 459 P.2d 712 (1969).	1	1974–1974
Arizona Power Co. v. Hayes neutral ariz · 1922 2 sentences 1970Scott v. Scott, 75 Ariz. 116 , 252 P.2d 571 (1953); Arizona Power Co. v. Hayes, 24 Ariz. 322 , 209 P. 280 (1922) ; Prosser, Torts, Sec. 39, p. 191 (2nd Ed.1955). 1970Scott v. Scott, 75 Ariz. 116 , 252 P.2d 571 (1953); Arizona Power Co. v. Hayes, 24 Ariz. 322 , 209 P. 280 (1922) ; Prosser, Torts, Sec. 39, p. 191 (2nd Ed.1955).	1	1970–1970
Scott v. Scott green ariz · 1953 2 sentences 1970Scott v. Scott, 75 Ariz. 116 , 252 P.2d 571 (1953); Arizona Power Co. v. Hayes, 24 Ariz. 322 , 209 P. 280 (1922) ; Prosser, Torts, Sec. 39, p. 191 (2nd Ed.1955). 1970Scott v. Scott, 75 Ariz. 116 , 252 P.2d 571 (1953); Arizona Power Co. v. Hayes, 24 Ariz. 322 , 209 P. 280 (1922) ; Prosser, Torts, Sec. 39, p. 191 (2nd Ed.1955).	1	1970–1970
Meiser v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. green wis · 1959 1 sentence 1967It is from cases such as these that a corollary rule can be devised that the exclusionary provision does not apply “ * * * where the property damaged is merely incidental to the property upon which the work is being performed * * Meiser v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., supra, 98 N.W.2d at 922 ; and see Annot, 62 A.L.R.2d 1242 , at 1244 (1958).	1	1967–1967
Zevon v. Tennebaum green ariz · 1952 2 sentences 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 . 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 .	1	1964–1964
Gray v. Gardiner green ariz · 1962 2 sentences 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 . 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 .	1	1964–1964
Caldwell v. Tremper green ariz · 1962 2 sentences 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 . 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 .	1	1964–1964
Pima County v. Bilby green ariz · 1960 2 sentences 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 . 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 .	1	1964–1964
Mendez v. Moya neutral ariz · 1939 2 sentences 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 . 1964Gray v. Gardiner, 92 Ariz. 208 , 375 P.2d 562 ; Caldwell v. Tremper, 90 Ariz. 241 , 367 P.2d 266 ; Pima County v. Bilby, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ; Zevon v. Tennebaum, 73 Ariz. 281 , 240 P.2d 548 ; Mendez v. Moya, 54 Ariz. 44 , 91 P.2d 870 .	1	1964–1964
Pacific Construction Co. v. Cochran green ariz · 1926 2 sentences 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse. 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse.	1	1956–1956
Fox Tucson Theatres Corp. v. Lindsay green ariz · 1936 2 sentences 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse. 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse.	1	1956–1956
City of Phoenix v. Dickson green ariz · 1932 2 sentences 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse. 1956As in most community property states, Arizona follows the rule that damages for personal injuries of either spouse are community property, Pacific Const. Co. v. Cochran, 1926, 29 Ariz. 554 , 243 P. 405 ; City of Phoenix v. Dickson, 1932, 40 Ariz. 403 , 12 P.2d 618 ; Fox Tucson Theatres Corporation v. Lindsay, 1936, 47 Ariz. 388 , 56 P.2d 183 , and as a corollary of this doctrine the contributory negligence of one spouse is imputable to the other and will bar any recovery for damages for personal injuries sustained by the other spouse.	1	1956–1956

Where else courts name it

TX 409 (1913–2026) CA 280 (1900–2026) IL 103 (1873–2023) NY 87 (1911–2025) PA 86 (1915–2024) NJ 77 (1896–2026) MD 69 (1928–2023) WA 66 (1922–2026) MO 65 (1905–2025) GA 57 (1912–2023) FL 49 (1938–2023) AL 44 (1909–2015) OH 39 (1932–2026) MI 37 (1940–2023) CT 37 (1937–2025) LA 35 (1919–2024) IN 34 (1918–2019) IA 32 (1917–2023) MS 32 (1876–2022) WI 32 (1965–2024) KS 27 (1875–2026) OR 26 (1897–2026) TN 26 (1904–2025) KY 25 (1922–2024) WV 24 (1901–2023) VA 23 (1963–2024) WY 23 (1968–2022) SC 20 (1907–2020) CO 19 (1912–2021) DE 19 (1945–2026) VT 17 (1913–2025) MT 16 (1898–2012) NC 15 (1921–2018) AZ 15 (1956–2018) MA 14 (1951–2024) NM 14 (1914–2014) RI 14 (1968–2018) OK 13 (1925–2014) ME 12 (1922–2020) NE 12 (1959–2023) MN 12 (1954–2025) ID 11 (1977–2021) DC 11 (1976–2025) UT 11 (1979–2026) AR 11 (1927–2017) ND 7 (1895–2015) NV 6 (1983–2015) NH 3 (1997–2021) SD 3 (1998–2003) HI 2 (1944–2015) AK 2 (1993–2023)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check