DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

171 citing documents.

  • Swanson v. Swanson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Swanson v. Swanson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Holmes v. Spector Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Holmes v. Spector Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Rgs Diamonds v. Tal Designs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Rgs Diamonds v. Tal Designs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Olesen v. daniel/burge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Olesen v. daniel/burge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Hunter v. Barna Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Hunter v. Barna Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Watkins v. Lane Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Watkins v. Lane Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Bank of Ariz., –65 ¶ 6 (2013) (stating that we typically consider waived arguments unsupported by adequate explanation or citations to relevant authorities or the record).
  • Watson v. Peck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Watson v. Peck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing a preference for deciding on merits over summarily dismissing on procedural grounds).
  • Webster v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Webster v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    Bank of Ariz., - 43 (App. 1984).
  • Avalon Hills v. Lang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Avalon Hills v. Lang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Hanger v. Hanger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Hanger v. Hanger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    -43 (1984) ("[The Court is] not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant's claims."); see also United States v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955, 956 (7th Cir. 1991) ("Judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in [the record].").
  • Wilson v. Candler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Wilson v. Candler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Martinez v. Colburt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Martinez v. Colburt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Ball v. Adhs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Ball v. Adhs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Neal I. v. Dcs, A.I. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Neal I. v. Dcs, A.I. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing that courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than dismissing on procedural grounds).
  • Self v. Higher Logic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Self v. Higher Logic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43 (App. 1984).
  • Hernandez v. Orozco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Hernandez v. Orozco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Bank of Ariz., (“Based upon the totally deficient briefs filed on behalf of appellant, we have little choice but to dismiss this appeal.”).
  • Jacobs v. Dental Care Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Jacobs v. Dental Care Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., –43 (App. 1984).
  • Mothershead v. Dulara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Mothershead v. Dulara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., –43 (App. 1984).
  • State v. McEvoy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • State v. McEvoy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    ¶13 This court generally declines “to address issues that are not argued adequately, with appropriate citation to supporting authority.” ¶ 18 (App. 2016); see also ARCAP 13(a)(7)(A) (argument must contain supporting reasons for each contention with citations of legal authorities); Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank, 6 STATE, et al. v. McEVOY Decision of the Court (App. 1984) (a deficient brief may result in the dismissal of an appeal).
  • Ingersoll v. Abec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Ingersoll v. Abec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    Bank of Ariz., (recognizing “courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds”).
  • Jimenez v. Fry's Food Stores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Jimenez v. Fry's Food Stores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    Bank, (a deficient brief may result in the dismissal of an appeal).
  • Latif v. Eldilemi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Latif v. Eldilemi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz.
  • Tsanos v. Zistatsis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Tsanos v. Zistatsis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (dismissing appeal based on the deficient briefs filed).
  • State v. Kellywood 433 P.3d 1205 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
  • State v. Kellywood 433 P.3d 1205 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
    See Adams v. Valley Nat'l Bank of Ariz. , , 342, , 527 (App. 1984) (general preference for resolving cases on merits).
  • Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (recognizing that courts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than dismissing on procedural grounds).