Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Hoffman v. Hoffman, 417 P.2d 717.

131 citing documents.

Stapley v. Stapley 485 P.2d 1181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Air East, Inc. v. Wheatley 482 P.2d 899 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Air East, Inc. v. Wheatley 482 P.2d 899 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Ghyselinck v. Buchanan 474 P.2d 844 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Ghyselinck v. Buchanan 474 P.2d 844 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Construction Trucking Service 473 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Construction Trucking Service 473 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Arizona Tank Lines, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 473 P.2d 821 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Arizona Tank Lines, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 473 P.2d 821 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
131 , , we will normally take a failure to file an answering brief as a confession of error unless there are circumstances indicating that we should not.
State ex rel. Flickinger v. Harris 464 P.2d 808 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State ex rel. Flickinger v. Harris 464 P.2d 808 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Brown v. Brown 459 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Brown v. Brown 459 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
O'Neil v. Aye 459 P.2d 340 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
O'Neil v. Aye 459 P.2d 340 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Although we have recognized exceptions to this “con-, fession of error” rule, see, e. g., , Blech v. Blech, 6 Ariz.App.
Marley v. Spaulding 457 P.2d 753 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Marley v. Spaulding 457 P.2d 753 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Leach v. Leach, 179 Kan.
Porter v. Pfahl 447 P.2d 578 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Porter v. Pfahl 447 P.2d 578 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Castillo v. Harbour, 8 Ariz.App.
Del Castillo v. Harbour 445 P.2d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Del Castillo v. Harbour 445 P.2d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
However, we believe it the duty of this court to examine the record to determine whether there are debatable issues, , and we believe that it is most appropriate to do so under the circumstances here.
Counterman v. Counterman 433 P.2d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Counterman v. Counterman 433 P.2d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Blech v. Blech 430 P.2d 710 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Blech v. Blech 430 P.2d 710 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Solomon v. Solomon 427 P.2d 156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Solomon v. Solomon 427 P.2d 156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
City of Phoenix v. Schooley 424 P.2d 191 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
City of Phoenix v. Schooley 424 P.2d 191 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
And while this Court has stated that we do not read these cases as requiring an automatic reversal where the appellee has failed to file a brief, , where there are debatable issues before this Court, we may assume that the failure to file an answering brief is a confession of reversible error.
United Bonding Insurance v. Thomas J. Grosso Investment, Inc. 419 P.2d 546 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
United Bonding Insurance v. Thomas J. Grosso Investment, Inc. 419 P.2d 546 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966