Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Urias v. PCS Health Systems, Inc., 118 P.3d 29.

39 citing documents.

KAUFMAN v. GUEVARA Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
KAUFMAN v. GUEVARA Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
See Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 38 (App. 2005) (“[A] court must find that the principal had the right to control the purported agent’s conduct for the transaction at issue.”).
Thompson v. Spina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Thompson v. Spina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20 (App. 2005).
Rural Road v. Acupuncture Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Rural Road v. Acupuncture Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶14 The terms offset and setoff are used interchangeably to describe the right of parties “owing each other money to apply their mutual debts against each other, thereby avoiding ‘the absurdity of making A pay B when B owes A.’” Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 21 (App. 2005) (quoting Citizens Bank v. Strumpf, 516 U.S. 16, 18 (1995)).
Nui v. Kdl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Nui v. Kdl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20 (App. 2005).
Schires v. Carlat Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Schires v. Carlat Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
We review the trial court’s grant of summary judgment de novo “to determine whether any genuine issues of material fact exist and whether the trial court correctly applied the law.” Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20 (2005).
Best Western v. Oakland Park Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Best Western v. Oakland Park Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
See Cook, 227 Ariz. at 334, ¶ 14; Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., -88, ¶¶ 29-35 (App. 2005).
Town of Marana v. Pima County 281 P.3d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Town of Marana v. Pima County 281 P.3d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
§ 1-213 (2002) (“Words and phrases shall be construed according to the common and approved use of the language.”); see also Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22 , (“If the legislature has not defined a word or phrase in a statute, we will consider respected dictionary definitions.”).
Goodman v. Physical Resource Engineering, Inc. 270 P.3d 852 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Goodman v. Physical Resource Engineering, Inc. 270 P.3d 852 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
See Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶¶ 33, 37-41, 36 (App. 2005) (no agency where insurer did not control claim processor‟s negotiations to fulfill contract, although claim processor received funds “[o]n behalf of ” insurer); Brown v. Ariz. Dep’t of Real Estate, 181 Ariz. at 326, 890 P.2d at 621 (right to control transaction factor
Cook v. Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. 258 P.3d 149 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Cook v. Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. 258 P.3d 149 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Generally, commercial transactions do not create a fiduciary relationship unless one party agrees to serve in a fiduciary capacity, Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 32
Loftus v. Arizona State University Public Safety Personnel Retirement System Local Board 255 P.3d 1020 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Rigel Corp. v. State 234 P.3d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Rigel Corp. v. State 234 P.3d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
¶ 21 , Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22
AZTAR CORP. v. US Fire Ins. Co. 224 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
AZTAR CORP. v. US Fire Ins. Co. 224 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20
Prince & Princess Enterprises, LLC v. State Ex Rel. Arizona Department of Health Services 209 P.3d 141 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Prince & Princess Enterprises, LLC v. State Ex Rel. Arizona Department of Health Services 209 P.3d 141 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
“If the legislature has not defined a word or phrase in a statute, we will consider respected dictionary definitions.” Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22
DeVries v. State 211 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
In re MH 2008-000097 210 P.3d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
In re MH 2008-000097 210 P.3d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22
DeVries v. State 211 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Uri as v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22
Koepnick v. Arizona State Land Department 212 P.3d 62 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Koepnick v. Arizona State Land Department 212 P.3d 62 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
When, as here, the legislature has "not defined a word or phrase in a statute, we will consider respected dictionary definitions.” Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22
Penn-America Insurance v. Sanchez 202 P.3d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Penn-America Insurance v. Sanchez 202 P.3d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20
Mein Ex Rel. Mein v. Cook 193 P.3d 790 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Mein Ex Rel. Mein v. Cook 193 P.3d 790 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., 1122
Palmer v. Palmer 170 P.3d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Palmer v. Palmer 170 P.3d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 20
City of Phoenix v. Harnish 150 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
City of Phoenix v. Harnish 150 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Urias v. PCS Health Sys., Inc., ¶ 22