Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Smyser v. City of Peoria, 160 P.3d 1186.

32 citing documents.

Haz-Mat v. Oxnard Commerceplex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Haz-Mat v. Oxnard Commerceplex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Anderson v. Winslow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Anderson v. Winslow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Allegra G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Allegra G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
appear[ed] pro se”); ¶ 50 (App. 2007) (noting that ARCAP 21 “only sets forth the procedure for requesting fees; it does not provide a substantive basis for a fee award”); Munger Chadwick, P.L.C.
Sanders v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sanders v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 33 (App. 2007); S. Dev.
Harianto v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Harianto v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Tondu v. State Farm Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tondu v. State Farm Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Koch-Gulloty v. Pascuzzi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Koch-Gulloty v. Pascuzzi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Martin v. Royal Sign Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Martin v. Royal Sign Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Although highly context-dependent, spoliation includes “[t]he intentional destruction of evidence.” ¶ 32 n.11 (App. 2007) (citation omitted).
nguyen/ta v. Am Commerce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
nguyen/ta v. Am Commerce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
at 199, 211 P.3d at 1183; ¶ 33
McMurtry v. Weatherford Hotel, Inc. 293 P.3d 520 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
McMurtry v. Weatherford Hotel, Inc. 293 P.3d 520 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
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
See Tilley v. Delci, 220 Ariz. *253 233, 239, ¶ 19, ( ¶ 50 , ); Country Mut.
Lips v. Scottsdale Healthcare Corp. 214 P.3d 434 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Lips v. Scottsdale Healthcare Corp. 214 P.3d 434 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
A. Spoliation ¶ 9 Spoliation is defined as “ ‘[t]he intentional destruction of evidence---- The destruction, or the significant and meaningful alteration of a document or instrument.’” , 438 n. 11, ¶ 32, , 1196 n. 11 (App. 2007) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1257 (6th ed.1990)).
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
Tilley v. Delci 204 P.3d 1082 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Tilley v. Delci 204 P.3d 1082 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
¶ 50 , (noting that ARCAP 21 “only sets forth the procedure for requesting fees; it does not provide a substantive basis for a fee award”).
In Re Estate of Newman 196 P.3d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
In Re Estate of Newman 196 P.3d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Grynberg v. Shaffer 165 P.3d 234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Grynberg v. Shaffer 165 P.3d 234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007