Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite LaFaro v. Cahill, 56 P.3d 56.

61 citing documents.

Streeter v. Visor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Mahar v. Acuna, II 287 P.3d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Mahar v. Acuna, II 287 P.3d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
an injunction.” ¶¶ 7-8, -59 (App. 2002) (permitting appeal of injunction against harassment).
Cardoso v. Soldo 277 P.3d 811 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Cardoso v. Soldo 277 P.3d 811 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Id.; ¶ 9 , (injunction against harassment restricting political speech not moot because it presented “an issue of great public importance that is capable of evading review”).
MARIO W. v. Kaipio 265 P.3d 389 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
MARIO W. v. Kaipio 265 P.3d 389 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
When doubts exist as to a statute’s viability, we attempt to construe the statute with “a reasonable and constitutional meaning.” ¶ 21 , ( ¶ 20 , ).
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
DeVries v. State 211 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
DeVries v. State 211 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009