Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Union Rock & Mat. v. Scottsdale Con. Center, 678 P.2d 453.

32 citing documents.

Seidman v. Weiler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Seidman v. Weiler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Cf. Union Rock & (new matters in motion for reconsideration may be considered by another trial court when new facts or circumstances come to light between the granting of the motion for summary judgment and the motion for reconsideration).
Levine v. Haralson, Miller, Pitt, Feldman & Mcanally, P. L.C. 418 P.3d 1007 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Levine v. Haralson, Miller, Pitt, Feldman & Mcanally, P. L.C. 418 P.3d 1007 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
272-73, , 457-58 (App. 1983) ).
Bogard v. CANNON & WENDT ELEC. CO., INC. 212 P.3d 17 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Bogard v. CANNON & WENDT ELEC. CO., INC. 212 P.3d 17 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
While a trial court generally should not reconsider a motion previously decided by another judge in the absence of new circumstances, Union Rock & , (citations omitted), an intervening appellate court decision, such as Shotwell , is a new circumstance that may justify reconsideration of an earlier ruling by a different trial judge, see Lemons, *335 141 Ariz. at 504 , 687 P.2d at 1259 (“the respondent judge was acting within his
Evans Withycombe, Inc. v. Western Innovations, Inc. 159 P.3d 547 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Evans Withycombe, Inc. v. Western Innovations, Inc. 159 P.3d 547 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Union Rock & -73 , -58 (App.1983).
Powell-Cerkoney v. TCR-Montana Ranch Joint Venture 860 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Powell-Cerkoney v. TCR-Montana Ranch Joint Venture 860 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Union Rock & , Union Constr.
MLM Const. Co., Inc. v. Pace Corp. 836 P.2d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
MLM Const. Co., Inc. v. Pace Corp. 836 P.2d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
S.K. Drywall, Inc. v. Developers Financial Group, Inc. 819 P.2d 931 Ariz. 1991
S.K. Drywall, Inc. v. Developers Financial Group, Inc. 819 P.2d 931 Ariz. 1991
Corp., -169 , -154 (Ct.App.1990); see also Union Rock & -72 , -57 (Ct.App.1983).
Egan-Ryan Mechanical Co. v. Cardon Meadows Development Corp. 818 P.2d 146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Egan-Ryan Mechanical Co. v. Cardon Meadows Development Corp. 818 P.2d 146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Subsequent changes in the statute, however, and our own decision in Union Rock & , require that liens pertaining to each phase of the construction be filed within ninety days after issuance of the relevant certificates of occupancy.
Hibbs v. Calcot, Ltd. 801 P.2d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Hibbs v. Calcot, Ltd. 801 P.2d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Superior Court 793 P.2d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Superior Court 793 P.2d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Bowman v. Board of Regents 785 P.2d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Bowman v. Board of Regents 785 P.2d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Lueck v. UNITED DAIRYMEN OF ARIZONA 782 P.2d 708 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Lueck v. UNITED DAIRYMEN OF ARIZONA 782 P.2d 708 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 770 P.2d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 770 P.2d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
We find that the only logical and sensible interpretation of the language of category 3, and the only one that avoids rendering portions of categories 1 and 2 superfluous, Gortarez v. Smitty’s Super Value, Inc., supra; Union Rock & , is that any non-irrigation user other than a city, town or private water company is entitled to Type 2 grandfathered rights.
Prairie State Bank v. Internal Revenue Service 745 P.2d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Prairie State Bank v. Internal Revenue Service 745 P.2d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Main I Ltd. Partnership v. Venture Capital Construction & Development Corp. 741 P.2d 1234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Main I Ltd. Partnership v. Venture Capital Construction & Development Corp. 741 P.2d 1234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Center, , , 455 (App. 1983).
State v. Kangas 704 P.2d 285 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Kangas 704 P.2d 285 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
See Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 2 v. Superior Court in and for Maricopa County, , Union Rock & , Union Const. Co., Inc. v. Beneficial Standard Mortg.