Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Town of Paradise Valley v. Gulf Leisure Corp., 557 P.2d 532.

48 citing documents.

Robertson v. La Paz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Robertson v. La Paz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
U-Haul v. Tempe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
U-Haul v. Tempe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Scenic Arizona v. City of Phoenix Board of Adjustment 268 P.3d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Scenic Arizona v. City of Phoenix Board of Adjustment 268 P.3d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
827 ) (applying the United States Supreme Court’s definition of standing as “whether the interest sought to be protected by the complainant is arguably within the zone of interests to be protected or regulated by the statute”); Town of Paradise Valley v. Gulf Leisure *424 Carp., -07 , -39 (1976) (same).
Redelsperger v. City of Avondale 87 P.3d 843 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Redelsperger v. City of Avondale 87 P.3d 843 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
this court should leave the decision of whether to grant a conditional use permit by legislative means to the City’s legislative body to decide.
McLoughlin Catalina v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
McLoughlin Catalina v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of Tucson 36 P.3d 1208 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of Tucson 36 P.3d 1208 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
1372 (D.Ariz.1985); , , to support its claim that it had vested rights in the completion of the project.
Rivera v. City of Phoenix 925 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Rivera v. City of Phoenix 925 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Phoenix City Council v. Canyon Ford, Inc., 12 ArizApp.
Owens v. City of Phoenix 884 P.2d 1100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Owens v. City of Phoenix 884 P.2d 1100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Estate of Bohn v. Waddell 848 P.2d 324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Estate of Bohn v. Waddell 848 P.2d 324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
in support of its position.
Fidelity National Title Insurance v. Pima County 831 P.2d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Transportation 830 P.2d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Transportation 830 P.2d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Fidelity National Title Insurance v. Pima County 831 P.2d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
272 P. 923 (1928); , , Phoenix City Council v. Canyon Ford, Inc., 12 Ariz.App.
Neal v. City of Kingman 810 P.2d 572 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Neal v. City of Kingman 810 P.2d 572 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
THE VESTED RIGHT CLAIM WAS NOT WAIVED A vested right arises where a permit has been legitimately issued and the permittee has substantially relied upon the permit and incurred considerable expense, , or the permittee in good faith has commenced construction, Phoenix City Council v. Canyon Ford, Inc.
Zeigler v. Kirschner 781 P.2d 54 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Zeigler v. Kirschner 781 P.2d 54 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Stoffel v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 784 P.2d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Stoffel v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 784 P.2d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Arkules v. Board of Adjustment 780 P.2d 431 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Arkules v. Board of Adjustment 780 P.2d 431 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
See especially Town of Paradise Valley v Gulf Leisure Corp., 557 P2d 532 , at 610 and 611 (1976).
Burroughs v. Town of Paradise Valley 724 P.2d 1239 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Burroughs v. Town of Paradise Valley 724 P.2d 1239 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
VESTED RIGHT TO BUILD Appellant bases her claim to a
Matter of Estate of Kerr 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Valley National Bank v. Dykstra 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Matter of Estate of Kerr 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Valley National Bank v. Dykstra 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Rivera v. City of Douglas 644 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Rivera v. City of Douglas 644 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Bartolomeo v. Town of Paradise Valley 631 P.2d 564 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Bartolomeo v. Town of Paradise Valley 631 P.2d 564 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
we said: At the outset, it must be noted for purposes of our discussion that no distinction is drawn between “special use permit”, “variance”, “rezoning”, “amendment”, or “building permit” with regard to Paradise Valley.
Schoenberger v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ETC. 606 P.2d 18 Ariz. 1980
Schoenberger v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ETC. 606 P.2d 18 Ariz. 1980
National Advertising Co. v. Arizona Department of Transportation 617 P.2d 50 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
National Advertising Co. v. Arizona Department of Transportation 617 P.2d 50 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
and Phoenix City Council v. Canyon Ford, Inc., 12 Ariz.App.
Minor v. Cochise County 608 P.2d 313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
Minor v. Cochise County 608 P.2d 313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
Rondelli v. County of Pima 586 P.2d 1295 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
Rondelli v. County of Pima 586 P.2d 1295 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978