Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 681 P.2d 390.

214 citing documents.

Grosvenor Holdings v. Pinal County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Grosvenor Holdings v. Pinal County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Ratliff v. Hardison 199 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Ratliff v. Hardison 199 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Co., , (good faith offer to perform on terms other than those in contract not anticipatory repudiation).
State of Arizona v. Michael Manuel Dixon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Michael Manuel Dixon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Co. of America, (“Appeals lie from findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgments, not from ruminations of the trial judge.”).
Weatherguard Roofing Co., Inc. v. DR WARD CONST., CO., INC. 152 P.3d 1227 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Weatherguard Roofing Co., Inc. v. DR WARD CONST., CO., INC. 152 P.3d 1227 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Co. of America, , which states: It is a basic rule of contract construction that to incorporate by reference: "[T]he reference must be clear and unequivocal and must be called to the attention of the other party, he must consent thereto, and the terms of the incorporated document must be known or ea
In the Matter of Carly Van Dox Ariz. 2007
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
In the Matter of Carly Van Dox Ariz. 2007
Co., 140 Ariz. 238, 286, (reviewing court “will not substitute its judgment as to credibility of witnesses or weight of evidence for that of the [factfinder]”).
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
Co., , (reviewing court “will not substitute its judgment as to credibility of witnesses or weight of evidence for that of the [factfinder]”).
Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa County 88 P.3d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa County 88 P.3d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Co., , (upholding the admissibility of appraisal expert’s testimony using the market and income approaches but not the cost approach).
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Co., , (to ascertain intent, we look at words in the context of the entire contract).
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Lee 13 P.3d 1169 Ariz. 2000
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Lee 13 P.3d 1169 Ariz. 2000
Co., , (litigant cannot ordinarily call its attorney as material witness to communications with other party and then claim privilege on cross-examination); see also Buffa, 147 Ariz. at 143 , 708 P.2d at 1334 .
Keggi v. Northbrook Property & Casualty Insurance 13 P.3d 785 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Keggi v. Northbrook Property & Casualty Insurance 13 P.3d 785 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Co. of America, , (“[W]here general words in a contract are followed by enumerated specific terms involving the same subject matter ...
In Re Estate of Pouser 975 P.2d 704 Ariz. 1999
In Re Estate of Pouser 975 P.2d 704 Ariz. 1999
Co. of America, , (“[A]ny ambiguity in ...
Midland Risk Management Co. v. Watford 876 P.2d 1203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Midland Risk Management Co. v. Watford 876 P.2d 1203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Hartford v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 870 P.2d 1202 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Hartford v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 870 P.2d 1202 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Business Realty of Arizona, Inc. v. Maricopa County 870 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Business Realty of Arizona, Inc. v. Maricopa County 870 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 847 P.2d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 847 P.2d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co., Etc.
Passey v. Great Western Associates II 850 P.2d 133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Passey v. Great Western Associates II 850 P.2d 133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co., , (for a document to incorporate another document by reference, the reference must be clear and unequivocal).
Rhue v. Dawson 841 P.2d 215 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Rhue v. Dawson 841 P.2d 215 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Town of Paradise Valley v. Laughlin 851 P.2d 109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Town of Paradise Valley v. Laughlin 851 P.2d 109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Co., , explained that the reason that an owner of property is permitted to testify as to its value even if not an expert is because “[a]n owner of property has, by definition, knowledge of the components of value that are useful in ascertaining value, and an owner, no less than an ‘expert,’ can ba
Aboud v. DeConcini 842 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Aboud v. DeConcini 842 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
As stated in United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Company, etc., , : Generally, a contract cannot be breached until the date the duty of performance arrives.
McAlister v. Citibank 829 P.2d 1253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
McAlister v. Citibank 829 P.2d 1253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Co., -296 , -448 (App.1983).
Einhorn v. Valley Medical Specialists, P.C. 838 P.2d 1332 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Einhorn v. Valley Medical Specialists, P.C. 838 P.2d 1332 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Hall v. Schulte 836 P.2d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Hall v. Schulte 836 P.2d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Co., -58 , -10 (App.1983).
DKI Corp./Sylvan Pools v. Industrial Commission 819 P.2d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
DKI Corp./Sylvan Pools v. Industrial Commission 819 P.2d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
McNeel v. McNeel 818 P.2d 198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
McNeel v. McNeel 818 P.2d 198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991