Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Farmers Investment Co. v. Arizona State Land Department, 666 P.2d 469.

38 citing documents.

Mills v. Abotr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Mills v. Abotr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Co. v. Ariz. State Land Dep’t, 374 (App. 1982) (in affirming finding that public auction of groundwater “from state land was void because the [Arizona State Land] Department could not impose” a reimbursement condition, rejecting administrative exhaustion argument because “[t]he administrative process had indeed run its course so as to allow j
Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. v. City of Tucson 381 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. v. City of Tucson 381 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Co. v. Ariz. State Land Dep’t, quoting McKart v. United States, 395 U.S. 185, 193 (1969).
Bailey-Null v. ValueOptions 209 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Bailey-Null v. ValueOptions 209 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Mullenaux v. Graham County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Mullenaux v. Graham County 82 P.3d 362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Bentivegna v. Powers Steel & Wire Products, Inc. 81 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Mullenaux v. Graham County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Co. v. Ariz. State Land Dep’t, P.2d 469 (App. 1982) (finding on rehearing that word “may” does not make statute optional and merely affords opportunity not to appeal); Ariz. Law Enforcement Merit Sys.
Bentivegna v. Powers Steel & Wire Products, Inc. 81 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
(quoting 2 Am.Jur.2d, Administrative Law, § 598 at 432-33 (1962)); see also Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Envtl.
Mullenaux v. Graham County 82 P.3d 362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Co. v. Ariz. State Land Dep’t, , (finding on rehearing that word “may” does not make statute optional and merely affords opportunity not to appeal); Ariz. Law Enforcement Merit Sys.
Smith v. Cigna HealthPlan 52 P.3d 205 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Smith v. Cigna HealthPlan 52 P.3d 205 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t, quoting United States v. Utah Constr.
Walters v. Maricopa County 990 P.2d 677 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Walters v. Maricopa County 990 P.2d 677 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t
Phoenix Children's Hospital v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 987 P.2d 763 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Phoenix Children's Hospital v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 987 P.2d 763 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t
Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 951 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 951 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Herzberg v. David, 27 Ariz.App.
Hamilton v. State 925 P.2d 731 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Hamilton v. State 925 P.2d 731 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t, , (holding that use of the term “may” does not indicate that procedural requirements are permissive).
Southwest Ambulance, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Health Services 902 P.2d 1362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Southwest Ambulance, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Health Services 902 P.2d 1362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep't
Martori v. Arizona State Land Department 861 P.2d 1182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Martori v. Arizona State Land Department 861 P.2d 1182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t, , (imposition of an unauthorized condition chilled the bidding in violation of Enabling Act and Arizona law).
Cochise County v. Kirschner 830 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Cochise County v. Kirschner 830 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
The reason for the doctrine is “ ‘to allow an administrative agency to perform functions within its special competence — to make a factual record, to apply its expertise, and to correct its own errors so as to moot judicial controversies.’ ” , quoting Parisi v. Davidson, 405 U.S. 34, 37 , 92 S.Ct.
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
Gilbert v. Board of Medical Examiners 745 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Gilbert v. Board of Medical Examiners 745 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Co. v. Arizona State Land Dep’t
Casillas v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 739 P.2d 800 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Casillas v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 739 P.2d 800 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
St. Mary's Hospital & Health Center v. State 721 P.2d 666 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
St. Mary's Hospital & Health Center v. State 721 P.2d 666 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Oliver v. Arizona Department of Racing 708 P.2d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Oliver v. Arizona Department of Racing 708 P.2d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985