Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Lee v. Lee, 649 P.2d 997.

111 citing documents.

Danielle J. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Danielle J. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Thompson v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Thompson v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 13 (App. 2007) (citing Miller v. 6 -23 (App. 1984), ).
Tutora v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Tutora v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Bank of America v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Bank of America v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See ARCAP 9(a) (in order to appeal a judgment, party must file notice of appeal no later than 30 days after entry of the judgment from which the appeal is taken); (failure to file timely notice following entry of order sought to be appealed deprives appellate court of jurisdiction).
Lewis v. Rehkow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Lewis v. Rehkow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Shacknai v. Shacknai Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Shacknai v. Shacknai Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Iuliano v. Wloch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Iuliano v. Wloch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(finding no jurisdiction to consider an argument raised after filing a notice of appeal).
In Re the Marriage of Thorn 330 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In Re the Marriage of Thorn 330 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Ramsay v. WHEELER-RAMSAY 232 P.3d 1249 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Ramsay v. WHEELER-RAMSAY 232 P.3d 1249 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Although the court is without authority to order a party to pay a non-party creditor for disputed debts, -24 , -03 (App.1982), the debts were not disputed in this case.
Marriage of Boncoskey v. Boncoskey 167 P.3d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Marriage of Boncoskey v. Boncoskey 167 P.3d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
consider[]” assignment of error when “[a]n examination of the notice of appeal indicate[d] that no appeal [had been] taken from the ruling of the court” that appellant had claimed was erroneous); cf. Hirsch v. Nat’l Van Lines, Inc., (“The scope of an appeal from a denial of a Rule 60 motion is restricted to the questions raised by the motion to set aside .
Marriage of Birt v. Birt 96 P.3d 544 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Marriage of Birt v. Birt 96 P.3d 544 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Schlaefer v. Financial Management Service, Inc. 996 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Schlaefer v. Financial Management Service, Inc. 996 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Such general statements do exist: “ ‘The allocation of community liabilities determines the rights and obligations of the parties before the court only with respect to each other.’
Toth v. Toth 946 P.2d 900 Ariz. 1997
Hill v. Maricopa County 950 P.2d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Hill v. Maricopa County 950 P.2d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Estate of P.K.L. v. J.K.S. 943 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Estate of PKL v. JKS 943 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Estate of PKL v. JKS 943 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Bates & Springer of Arizona
Estate of P.K.L. v. J.K.S. 943 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Bates & Springer of Arizona
Premier Financial Services. v. Citibank 912 P.2d 1309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Premier Financial Services. v. Citibank 912 P.2d 1309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Community Guardian Bank v. Hamlin 898 P.2d 1005 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Community Guardian Bank v. Hamlin 898 P.2d 1005 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
123— 24, -03 (App.1982).
Navajo Nation v. MacDonald 885 P.2d 1104 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Navajo Nation v. MacDonald 885 P.2d 1104 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
we held, “[i]n the absence of a timely notice of appeal, ...
PNL Credit L.P. v. Southwest Pacific Investment, Inc. 877 P.2d 832 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
PNL Credit L.P. v. Southwest Pacific Investment, Inc. 877 P.2d 832 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
(failure to file a timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional).
Kennedy v. Linda Brock Automotive Plaza, Inc. 856 P.2d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Kennedy v. Linda Brock Automotive Plaza, Inc. 856 P.2d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Lynch v. Lynch 791 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Lynch v. Lynch 791 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Styers v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR CTY. OF MOHAVE 779 P.2d 352 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Styers v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR CTY. OF MOHAVE 779 P.2d 352 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Whether the court distributes debt or confines itself to assets, the court should ordinarily attempt “a substantially equal division which neither rewards nor punishes either party.”
Reed v. Reed 740 P.2d 963 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Reed v. Reed 740 P.2d 963 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
does not mandate a contrary result based on petitioner’s failure to appeal the trial court’s order establishing the specific amount of respondent’s award of fees and expenses.
Sample v. Sample 731 P.2d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986