Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State Ex Rel. Corbin v. Arizona Corp. Commission, 693 P.2d 362.

26 citing documents.

ruco/thaler v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
ruco/thaler v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
for the proposition that the Commission’s procedural orders are not subject to the APA.
Hasse v. Avondale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Hasse v. Avondale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Corbin v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n
Burns v. Apsc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Burns v. Apsc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, Polaris, 133 Ariz. at 503 (noting that the Commission “entered a cease and 8 BURNS v. APSC, et al. Opinion of the Court desist order” and “issued several subpoenas duces tecum to gather information from Po
Sun City v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sun City v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n
Reyes v. Frank's Service & Trucking, LLC 334 P.3d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Reyes v. Frank's Service & Trucking, LLC 334 P.3d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, (“[T]he fact that the depositions were ultimately not used is not dispositive.”).
BNSF Railway Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 268 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
BNSF Railway Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 268 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, , Ariz. Pub.
MOTZER Dba RLM DESIGNS v. ESCALANTE Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
MOTZER Dba RLM DESIGNS v. ESCALANTE Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, 373 (App. 1984).
Bennett James L. Bennett Money Purchase Pension Plan Meyerstein v. Baxter Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Bennett James L. Bennett Money Purchase Pension Plan Meyerstein v. Baxter Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, -30, -73 (App. 1984) (photocopies of deposition transcript allowable taxable cost).
In Re Nelson 86 P.3d 374 Ariz. 2004
In Re Nelson 86 P.3d 374 Ariz. 2004
Corbin v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, 143 Ariz. 219, 229, (citations omitted).
Schritter v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 36 P.3d 739 Ariz. 2001
Schritter v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 36 P.3d 739 Ariz. 2001
Corbin v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n, , , Young’s , Fowler v. Great American Ins.
Matter of Zang 741 P.2d 267 Ariz. 1987
Matter of Zang 741 P.2d 267 Ariz. 1987
(ex parte contacts between attorney and commission member cured by removing offending officer, reviewing the record, and allowing additional argument and briefing by the parties); In re Logan, 71 N.J.
Pine-Strawberry Improvement Ass'n v. Arizona Corp. Commission 732 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Pine-Strawberry Improvement Ass'n v. Arizona Corp. Commission 732 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Carvajal 709 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Carvajal 709 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
A recognized exception to this finality rule, at least in civil cases, is the doctrine of “fraud upon the court.” As a threshold matter we see no reason not to apply this civil doctrine to criminal cases as it is a “species of fraud which constitutes an attempt to defile the court itself.” , and as such tends to corrupt judicial power and debauch the power of adjudication.