Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480.

60 citing documents.

SVENDSEN v. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 323 P.3d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
SVENDSEN v. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 323 P.3d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
of Ins., -48, -12 (1966) (observing jurisdiction of court of appeals generally concurrent with that of supreme court); (finding appellate jurisdiction based partly on appeals transfer statute, A.R.S.
Parker, Springer Jr., Anderson v. Committee for Sustainable Retirement in Support of Initiative 314 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Parker, Springer Jr., Anderson v. Committee for Sustainable Retirement in Support of Initiative 314 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
(“‘Due process entitles a party to notice and an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.’”)
Western States Petroleum, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 304 P.3d 539 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Western States Petroleum, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 304 P.3d 539 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Cook v. Losnegard 265 P.3d 384 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Cook v. Losnegard 265 P.3d 384 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
“Due process entitles a party to notice and an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.” ¶ 16
Gaveck v. Arizona State Board of Podiatry Examiners 215 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Gaveck v. Arizona State Board of Podiatry Examiners 215 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009