Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Di Orio v. City of Scottsdale, 408 P.2d 849.

66 citing documents.

Weller v. Weller 480 P.2d 379 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Weller v. Weller 480 P.2d 379 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Burrell v. Southern Pacific Company 474 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Burrell v. Southern Pacific Company 474 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
281 , , and Di Orio v. City of Scottsdale, 1965, , .
Moore Drug Company v. Schaneman 461 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Moore Drug Company v. Schaneman 461 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
United States v. United Air Lines, 216 F.Supp.
Quintero v. Continental Rent-A-Car System, Inc. 453 P.2d 999 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Quintero v. Continental Rent-A-Car System, Inc. 453 P.2d 999 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
The doctrine of collateral estoppel, , and in Spettigue v. Mahoney, 8 Ariz.App.
Spettigue v. Mahoney 445 P.2d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Spettigue v. Mahoney 445 P.2d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
This court, Division One thereof
San Manuel Copper Corporation v. Redmond 445 P.2d 162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
San Manuel Copper Corporation v. Redmond 445 P.2d 162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
96 , 232 A.2d 470 (1967)
Rail N Ranch Corporation v. State 441 P.2d 786 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Rail N Ranch Corporation v. State 441 P.2d 786 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
559, 661 , , and see Bernhard v. Bank of America Nat.
Cochise Sanitary Services, Inc. v. Corporation Commission 410 P.2d 677 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Cochise Sanitary Services, Inc. v. Corporation Commission 410 P.2d 677 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
We would agree that the doctrine of res judicata or collateral estoppel would not apply to the appellants, Cochise Sanitary Service, Inc., as a result of the Visco case, supra, , but the Visco case, supra, is res judicata as to the Corporation Commission which was a party to that case, and, of course, the propositions- *562 of law set forth in the Visco case are pursuasive as to the appellant.