Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Center v. SCF Arizonagreen1 sentence2021Ormond Builders, Inc., 216 Ariz. at 385, n.7 ; Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Ctr. v. SCF Ariz., 225 Ariz. 414, 418, ¶ 10, n.11 (App. 2010). 15 ASPEN, et al. v. WAKEFIELD Decision of the Court against him on its intentional-interference claim were inconsistent; and (3) Aspen’s closing argument addressing the intentional-interference claim exceeded the boundaries of permissible argument. | 1 | 1 |
Bar J Bar Cattle Co., Inc. v. Pacegreen1 sentence2021See Bar J Bar Cattle Co., Inc. v. Pace, 158 Ariz. 481, 486 (App. 1988) (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”). ¶39 In any event, the court retains broad discretion to award all, some, or none of the claimed fees in cases where the “settlement comparison” test applies. | 1 | 1 |
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Ormond Builders, Inc.green1 sentence2021Ormond Builders, Inc., 216 Ariz. at 385, n.7 ; Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Ctr. v. SCF Ariz., 225 Ariz. 414, 418, ¶ 10, n.11 (App. 2010). 15 ASPEN, et al. v. WAKEFIELD Decision of the Court against him on its intentional-interference claim were inconsistent; and (3) Aspen’s closing argument addressing the intentional-interference claim exceeded the boundaries of permissible argument. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mintz v. Bell Atlantic Systems Leasing International, Inc.
green
2 sentences1995As the court noted: "To apply Wagenseller and Bernstein as argued by [plaintiff] would create quite an anomaly: although having no claim against the company for the supervisor's failure to promote her, [plaintiff] would have an intentional interference claim against the supervisor himself." Id. 1995As the court noted: “To apply Wagenseller and Bernstein as argued by [plaintiff] would create quite an anomaly: although having no claim against the company for the supervisor’s failure to promote her, [plaintiff] would have an intentional interference claim against the supervisor himself.” Id. | 2 | 1995–1995 |
Safeway Ins. Co., Inc. v. Guerrero
green
2 sentences2005Safeway, 207 Ariz. at 88 -89 ¶¶ 27-30, 83 P.3d at 566-67 . 2005Safeway, 207 Ariz. at 88 -89 ¶¶ 27-30, 83 P.3d at 566-67 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Payne v. Pennzoil Corp.
green
2 sentences1995Payne v. Pennzoil Corp., 138 Ariz. 52 , 672 P.2d 1322 (App. 1983), affirmed dismissal of an intentional interference claim against supervisors who discharged Payne. 1995Payne v. Pennzoil Corp., 138 Ariz. 52 , 672 P.2d 1322 (App. 1983), affirmed dismissal of an intentional interference claim against supervisors who discharged Payne. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Barrow v. Arizona Board of Regents
green
2 sentences1995Barrow v. Arizona Bd. of Regents, 158 Ariz. 71 , 761 P.2d 145 (App. 1988), a post- Wagenseller case, followed Payne in affirming the dismissal of a professor's intentional interference claim against the university officials who caused his suspension. 1995Barrow v. Arizona Bd. of Regents, 158 Ariz. 71 , 761 P.2d 145 (App. 1988), a post- Wagenseller case, followed Payne in affirming the dismissal of a professor's intentional interference claim against the university officials who caused his suspension. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.