9 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1965–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Western Agricultural Insurance v. Chrysler Corp.green2 sentences2004But, to the extent the court suggested that the exception in § 12-684(A)(2) applies broadly to any post-manufacture alteration, modification, or installation of the product, even occurring before the final seller obtained the product, we disagree. ¶ 56 We also reject Bridgestone’s assertion, based on dicta in Western Agricultural Insurance Co. v. Chrysler Corp., 198 Ariz. 64, ¶ 25 , 6 P.3d 768, 773 (App.2000), that “some fault,” of any kind, by the seller “in causing the incident that is the subject of the action” defeats indemnity under § 12-684(A). 2004But, to the extent the court suggested that the exception in § 12-684(A)(2) applies broadly to any post-manufacture alteration, modification, or installation of the product, even occurring before the final seller obtained the product, we disagree. ¶ 56 We also reject Bridgestone’s assertion, based on dicta in Western Agricultural Insurance Co. v. Chrysler Corp., 198 Ariz. 64, ¶ 25 , 6 P.3d 768, 773 (App.2000), that “some fault,” of any kind, by the seller “in causing the incident that is the subject of the action” defeats indemnity under § 12-684(A). | 2 | 2 |
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Francegreen2 sentences2012See id. (“Under some circumstances this failure to give the suggested instruction, even though, as we have said, it correctly states the law, might not have been prejudicial, but we think in the present case it was.”). 1985Under some circumstances this failure to give the suggested instruction, even though, as we have said, it correctly states the law, might not have been prejudicial, but we think in the present case it was. 54 Ariz. at 145 , 94 P.2d 434 . | 1 | 2 |
State v. Garzagreen1 sentence2017State v. Garza, 216 Ariz. 56, 66, ¶ 42 (2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County of Mental Health Case No. MH 94-00592
green
1 sentence2025This Court suggested the exception may sometimes be met where there is “excessive verbal abuse, physical abuse, repeatedly walking away when the physicians attempt to discuss the matters, or nonresponsiveness.” Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Mario W. v. Hon. kaipio/state
green
1 sentence2023Id. at 129 ¶ 31. ¶83 Here, there was probable cause that Mitcham committed murder. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Rutledge v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc.
green
2 sentences1989Second, the court suggested that the rule was necessary to prevent plaintiffs from circumventing the “stringent standards necessary to otherwise establish a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress.” Rutledge, 148 Ariz. at 557 , 715 P.2d at 1245 . 1989Second, the court suggested that the rule was necessary to prevent plaintiffs from circumventing the “stringent standards necessary to otherwise establish a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress.” Rutledge, 148 Ariz. at 557 , 715 P.2d at 1245 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Duhammel v. Star
green
2 sentences1989This stricter standard was necessary “to protect defendants from unwarranted lawsuits.” Duhammel, 133 Ariz. at 561 , 653 P.2d at 18 . *340 Here, as in the above cases, the trial court dismissed plaintiffs’ privacy claims for failure to state a cause of action, relying on Rutledge and holding that the acts of which plaintiffs complained were not outrageous. 1989This stricter standard was necessary “to protect defendants from unwarranted lawsuits.” Duhammel, 133 Ariz. at 561 , 653 P.2d at 18 . *340 Here, as in the above cases, the trial court dismissed plaintiffs’ privacy claims for failure to state a cause of action, relying on Rutledge and holding that the acts of which plaintiffs complained were not outrageous. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Peters
green
2 sentences1965Incidentally, it may be noted that the trial court suggested an instruction on the point from the defense but no such instruction was submitted.” 44 Haw. at 5 , 352 P.2d at 332 . 1965Incidentally, it may be noted that the trial court suggested an instruction on the point from the defense but no such instruction was submitted.” 44 Haw. at 5 , 352 P.2d at 332 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
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.