Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Adams v. Valley Nat. Bank of Ariz., 678 P.2d 525.

171 citing documents.

  • Taylor v. Mizell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (noting this court is “not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant’s claims”).
  • Stromberg v. Heirigs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    Bank of Ariz., (“We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous 11 STROMBERG v. HEIRIGS Decision of the Court records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant’s claims.”).
  • Knight v. Elias Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • Layton v. Layton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • Knight v. Elias Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than dismissing on procedural grounds).
  • Layton v. Layton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Kuerschner v. Kuerschner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • Kuerschner v. Kuerschner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Rounding v. Bos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • Rounding v. Bos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    ("We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant's claims.").
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to D.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to D.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    See Brionna J. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 255 Ariz 471, 478–79 ¶¶ 30–31 (2023); Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing merits decisions are preferred over dismissal on procedural grounds).
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to H.H. and R.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to H.H. and R.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., –43 (App. 1984).
  • VOLESKY v. DCS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • VOLESKY v. DCS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    Failure to comply with ARCAP 13 generally results in waiver, see, ¶ 9 (App. 2022), but we have discretion to decline to apply waiver and decide a case on its merits, see Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (“We recognize that courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds.”)
  • Clay v. Geiser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Clay v. Geiser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than dismissing on procedural grounds).
  • Terrell v. Beck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Terrell v. Beck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than dismissing on procedural grounds).
  • Scott v. Scott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Scott v. Scott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Gutierrez v. phoenix/phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Gutierrez v. phoenix/phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (citation omitted).
  • Alan v. Lober Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Alan v. Lober Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Tang v. Haney-Tang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Tang v. Haney-Tang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    Although we prefer to decide cases on the merits rather than dismiss on procedural grounds, “there is a limit to which judicial leniency can be stretched.” Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Santos v. Az mini/benchmark Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Santos v. Az mini/benchmark Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (in our discretion, we may address the merits of waived arguments).
  • Danko v. Dorton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Danko v. Dorton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    Although we prefer to decide cases on the merits instead of dismissing on procedural grounds, “there is a limit to which judicial leniency can be stretched.” Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Danko v. Reash Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Danko v. Reash Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    Although we “prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds,” this Court has “a responsibility” to ensure appellate briefs “conform to an acceptable, minimum level of competency and performance.” Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to C.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • In Re Term of Parental Rights as to C.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (courts prefer to decide cases on their merits).
  • Parr v. united/valeey Forge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Parr v. united/valeey Forge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Giersz v. Walmart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Giersz v. Walmart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Nui v. Kdl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Nui v. Kdl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (we are not required to carry “the banner on behalf of the ill-advised appellant”).
  • R & a Smart v. Frank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • R & a Smart v. Frank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    Adam v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., ().
  • Flury v. Ortiz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Flury v. Ortiz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    Adams v. Valley Nat'l 2 FLURY v. ORTIZ, et al. Decision of the Court Bank of Ariz.
  • Amanda Campion and James Campion v. City of Tucson 536 P.3d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
  • Amanda Campion and James Campion v. City of Tucson 536 P.3d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (“We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant’s claims.”).
  • Bucks Financial v. Overley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Bucks Financial v. Overley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (“[C]ourts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds[.]”).