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 2007–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizonagreen2 sentences2025See Odom, 216 Ariz. at 535 ¶ 18. 2025See Odom, 216 Ariz. at 535 ¶ 18. | 2 | 2 |
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-5609green1 sentence2022After a multiple-day evidentiary hearing held over a few months in 2019, the court found that DCS had proved this ground and that termination was in H.B.’s best interests. 1 It therefore terminated Timothy’s parental rights to H.B. ¶7 In considering the length-of-sentence ground, the court relied on In re Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-5609, 149 Ariz. 573, 575 (App. 1986), which found that “[t]he ‘normal home’ referred to in the statute relates to [an incarcerated parent’s] obligation to provide a normal home, a home in which the [incarcerated parent] has a presence, and it d | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Michael J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
green
2 sentences2022After a multiple-day evidentiary hearing held over a few months in 2019, the court found that DCS had proved this ground and that termination was in H.B.’s best interests. 1 It therefore terminated Timothy’s parental rights to H.B. ¶7 In considering the length-of-sentence ground, the court relied on In re Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-5609, 149 Ariz. 573, 575 (App. 1986), which found that “[t]he ‘normal home’ referred to in the statute relates to [an incarcerated parent’s] obligation to provide a normal home, a home in which the [incarcerated parent] has a presence, and it d 2018Id. | 3 | 2007–2022 |
Allstate Insurance v. O'Toole
green
1 sentence2013Allstate, 182 Ariz. at 288 , 896 P,2d at 258. ¶ 24 In considering the Allstate factors, we first note that Butland did not present any reasonable explanation for his failure to comply with the deadlines. 6 Indeed, on appeal, Marquez does not contend otherwise. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.