Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Squaw Peak Community Covenant Church v. Anozira Development, Inc., 719 P.2d 295.

24 citing documents.

KB RANCH v. ECKARD Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
v. Anozira Dev., Inc., 2 This Court reviews questions of law— 2 KB Ranch also claimed the Eckards interfered with the easements by allowing their sprinklers to wet the roadway, failing to remove manure from the roadways, feeding cattle in the easements and encouraging cattle to congregate in the easements.
Paulden v. Big Chino Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Paulden v. Big Chino Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Covenant Church of Phoenix v. Anozira Dev., Inc.
Eden v. Deublein Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Eden v. Deublein Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
v. Anozira Dev., Inc., (awarding appellate fees under § 12-341.01 based on deed including an easement).
In Re Indenture of Trust Dated January 13, 1964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Weinstein v. Weinstein 326 P.3d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In Re Indenture of Trust Dated January 13, 1964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Weinstein v. Weinstein 326 P.3d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Scalia v. Green 271 P.3d 479 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Scalia v. Green 271 P.3d 479 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Covenant Church of Phoenix v. Anozira Dev., Inc., , Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes (“Restatement”) § 4.1(1) (2000) (“A servitude should be interpreted to give effect to the intention of the parties ascertained from the language used in the instrument----”).
IB Property Holdings, LLC v. Rancho Del Mar Apartments Ltd. Partnership 263 P.3d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
IB Property Holdings, LLC v. Rancho Del Mar Apartments Ltd. Partnership 263 P.3d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Covenant Church of Phoenix v. Anozira Dev., Inc.
Freeman v. Sorchych 245 P.3d 927 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Freeman v. Sorchych 245 P.3d 927 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Covenant Church of Phoenix v. Anozira Dev., Inc.
Kadlec v. Dorsey 223 P.3d 674 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Neal v. Brown 191 P.3d 1030 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Neal v. Brown 191 P.3d 1030 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
They also argue that, *19 as holders of the easement, they are entitled to the use of the full easement area unhampered by any obstructions, citing Squaw Peak Community Covenant Church v. Anozira Development, Inc.
Hunt v. Richardson 163 P.3d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Hunt v. Richardson 163 P.3d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Sabino Town & Country Estates Ass'n v. Carr 920 P.2d 26 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1996
Sabino Town & Country Estates Ass'n v. Carr 920 P.2d 26 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1996
See also Squaw Peak Community Covenant Church v. Anozira Dev., Inc., , (“The law is well-settled that the owner of an easement created by express grant is under no duty to make use of the easement in order to retain his entitlement.”).
Deese v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 813 P.2d 318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Deese v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 813 P.2d 318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
(because of reversal on the merits, appellate court must remand attorney’s fees issue to trial court for redetermination).