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 1963–2010 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Heinzegreen2 sentences2003See State v. Heinze, 196 Ariz. 126, ¶ 27 , 993 P.2d 1090, ¶ 27 (App. 1999) (“A fundamental principle of statutory construction is to give each section meaning so that no part is rendered void, superfluous, contradictory or insignificant.”). ¶ 18 Conversely, however, we agree with the District that the Coalition’s reading of the exception is too narrow and ignores the realities of real estate transactions. 2003See State v. Heinze, 196 Ariz. 126, ¶ 27 , 993 P.2d 1090, ¶ 27 (App. 1999) (“A fundamental principle of statutory construction is to give each section meaning so that no part is rendered void, superfluous, contradictory or insignificant.”). ¶ 18 Conversely, however, we agree with the District that the Coalition’s reading of the exception is too narrow and ignores the realities of real estate transactions. | 3 | 3 |
cluster 698444green1 sentence2010Compare Apollo Group, Inc. v. Avnet, Inc., 58 F.3d 477, 480 (9th Cir.1995) (stating that Salt River reflects that Arizona applies the economic loss rule “broadly”), with Evans v. Singer, 518 F.Supp.2d 1134, 1142-45 (D.Ariz.2007) (stating Salt River “provided anything but” a broad reading of the rule); compare also Carstens, 206 Ariz. at 128 ¶ 21, 75 P.3d at 1086 (arguing that Salt River supports applying doctrine to bar homeowners’ claim for economic losses from construction defects), with Valley Forge Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Evans v. Singergreen1 sentence2010Compare Apollo Group, Inc. v. Avnet, Inc., 58 F.3d 477, 480 (9th Cir.1995) (stating that Salt River reflects that Arizona applies the economic loss rule “broadly”), with Evans v. Singer, 518 F.Supp.2d 1134, 1142-45 (D.Ariz.2007) (stating Salt River “provided anything but” a broad reading of the rule); compare also Carstens, 206 Ariz. at 128 ¶ 21, 75 P.3d at 1086 (arguing that Salt River supports applying doctrine to bar homeowners’ claim for economic losses from construction defects), with Valley Forge Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Valley Forge Insurance v. Sam's Plumbing, LLCgreen2 sentences2010Co. v. Sam’s Plumbing, LLC, 220 Ariz. 512 , 515-16 ¶¶ 11-12, 207 P.3d 765, 768-69 (App.2009) (arguing that Carstens misconstrued Salt River). *323 ¶ 11 We begin by clarifying terminology. 2010Co. v. Sam’s Plumbing, LLC, 220 Ariz. 512 , 515-16 ¶¶ 11-12, 207 P.3d 765, 768-69 (App.2009) (arguing that Carstens misconstrued Salt River). *323 ¶ 11 We begin by clarifying terminology. | 1 | 1 |
Carstens v. City of Phoenixgreen2 sentences2010Compare Apollo Group, Inc. v. Avnet, Inc., 58 F.3d 477, 480 (9th Cir.1995) (stating that Salt River reflects that Arizona applies the economic loss rule “broadly”), with Evans v. Singer, 518 F.Supp.2d 1134, 1142-45 (D.Ariz.2007) (stating Salt River “provided anything but” a broad reading of the rule); compare also Carstens, 206 Ariz. at 128 ¶ 21, 75 P.3d at 1086 (arguing that Salt River supports applying doctrine to bar homeowners’ claim for economic losses from construction defects), with Valley Forge Ins. 2010Compare Apollo Group, Inc. v. Avnet, Inc., 58 F.3d 477, 480 (9th Cir.1995) (stating that Salt River reflects that Arizona applies the economic loss rule “broadly”), with Evans v. Singer, 518 F.Supp.2d 1134, 1142-45 (D.Ariz.2007) (stating Salt River “provided anything but” a broad reading of the rule); compare also Carstens, 206 Ariz. at 128 ¶ 21, 75 P.3d at 1086 (arguing that Salt River supports applying doctrine to bar homeowners’ claim for economic losses from construction defects), with Valley Forge Ins. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kelleygreen2 sentences1980The law of Arizona is, and for many years *305 has been, that “[i]t is not incumbent upon the court to give a defendant’s requested instructions where it is substantially covered, even though the phraseology is different (citation omitted).” State v. Kelley, 110 Ariz. 196, 197 , 516 P.2d 569, 570 (1973). 1980The law of Arizona is, and for many years *305 has been, that “[i]t is not incumbent upon the court to give a defendant’s requested instructions where it is substantially covered, even though the phraseology is different (citation omitted).” State v. Kelley, 110 Ariz. 196, 197 , 516 P.2d 569, 570 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Coffin v. United States
green
2 sentences1963A reading of the instruction clearly shows that it is completely consistent with the Coffin case and the decision said so: *89 “The instruction as given was correct, and in accordance with the rule indicated in Coffin v. U. S., 162 U.S. 664 , 16 Sup.Ct. 943 [ 40 L.Ed. 1109 ]. 1963A reading of the instruction clearly shows that it is completely consistent with the Coffin case and the decision said so: *89 “The instruction as given was correct, and in accordance with the rule indicated in Coffin v. U. S., 162 U.S. 664 , 16 Sup.Ct. 943 [ 40 L.Ed. 1109 ]. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
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.