12 Arizona opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
John C. Lincoln Hospital v. Maricopa Countygreen2 sentences2020Lincoln Hosp. & Health Corp. v. Maricopa County, 208 Ariz. 532, 543, ¶ 33 (App. 2004) (“We review evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion and generally affirm a trial court’s admission or exclusion of evidence absent a clear abuse or legal error and resulting prejudice.”) (emphasis added); Ariz. R. 2017“We review evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion and generally affirm a trial court’s admission or exclusion of evidence absent a clear abuse or legal error and resulting prejudice.” Id. at 544, ¶ 33 , 96 P.3d at 541 (citation omitted). ¶36 As the trial court indicates, the default rule in Arizona is that a broker who agrees to obtain insurance for a client owes a duty to the client “to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence” in so doing. | 9 | 9 |
Marquez v. Ortegagreen1 sentence2026Lincoln Hosp. & Health Corp. v. Maricopa Cnty., 208 Ariz. 532, 543, ¶ 33 (App. 2004); see also Marquez v. Ortega, 231 Ariz. 437, 441, ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (explaining the question is whether the court reached its decision without exceeding the bounds of reason, given the law and circumstances). | 1 | 1 |
Ryan v. San Francisco Peaks Trucking Co.green1 sentence2021Peaks Trucking Co. Inc., 228 Ariz. 42, 46, ¶ 12 (App. 2011) (quoting John C. | 1 | 1 |
Davis v. Davisgreen1 sentence2019When reviewing for abuse of discretion, we will generally affirm “absent a clear abuse or legal error and resulting prejudice.” Davis v. Davis, 246 Ariz. 63, 65, ¶ 6 (App. 2018) (citation 3 COHEN v. COHEN Decision of the Court omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Warner v. Southwest Desert Images, LLCgreen1 sentence2018Moreover, Father argues that absent such recordings the superior court’s orders should be vacated. ¶6 We review evidentiary rulings, including the denial of a motion in limine, for abuse of discretion, Warner v. Southwest Desert Images, LLC, 218 Ariz. 121, 133, ¶ 33 (App. 2008), and generally affirm “absent a clear abuse or legal error and resulting prejudice,” John C. | 1 | 1 |
Quigley v. City Court of the City of Tucsongreen1 sentence2016Sec., 210 Ariz. 77 , 83 ¶ 19 (App. 2005) (quoting Quigly v. Tucson City Court, 132 Ariz. 35, 37 (1982)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lohmeier v. Hammer
green
1 sentence2016This court reviews the superior court’s rulings for an abuse of discretion and will affirm “absent a clear abuse or legal error and resulting prejudice.” Lohmeier v. Hammer, 214 Ariz. 57 , 60 ¶ 6 (App. 2006). “[A]n abuse of discretion ‘is discretion manifestly unreasonable, or exercised on untenable grounds, or for untenable reasons.’” Lashonda M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Lashonda M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
green
1 sentence2016Sec., 210 Ariz. 77 , 83 ¶ 19 (App. 2005) (quoting Quigly v. Tucson City Court, 132 Ariz. 35, 37 (1982)). | 1 | 2016–2016 |