DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re Estate of Friedman, 177 P.3d 290.

28 citing documents.

  • Eli v. Procaccianti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Eli v. Procaccianti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    See ARCAP 1(d) (noting that the “aggrieved” party may appeal the judgment); ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (“An appeal may only be taken by a party aggrieved by the judgment.”) Id.
  • Kp Ventures v. Mohave Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Kp Ventures v. Mohave Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    10 KP VENTURES v. MOHAVE Decision of the Court ARCAP 1(d) (only a “party aggrieved by a judgment” may appeal, or cross- appeal); ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (“A party is ‘aggrieved’ if the judgment ‘denies that party some personal or property right or imposes on that party some substantial burden or obligation.’”).
  • Thompson v. Manten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Thompson v. Manten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    –52, ¶ 9 (App. 2008); see also ARCAP 1(d).
  • Budziszewski v. budziszewski/campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Budziszewski v. budziszewski/campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Sarah P., Michael M. v. Dcs, V.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Sarah P., Michael M. v. Dcs, V.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Hoyer v. Dougherty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Hoyer v. Dougherty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • Eli v. Procaccianti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Eli v. Procaccianti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    See ARCAP 1(d) (noting that the “aggrieved” party may appeal the judgment); ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (“An appeal may only be taken by a party aggrieved by the judgment.”) (emphasis added).
  • Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
  • Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
    Additionally, “[a]n appeal may only be taken by a party aggrieved by the judgment.” ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (citations omitted); Ariz. R. Civ.
  • In Re $15,379 in U.S. Currency 388 P.3d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
  • In Re $15,379 in U.S. Currency 388 P.3d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
    & n.11, -99 & 299 n.11 (App. 2008).
  • Bmo Harris v. Thruston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
  • Bmo Harris v. Thruston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
    ¶15 “An appeal may only be taken by a party aggrieved by the judgment.” ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (citations omitted).
  • Kurowski v. Gorman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • Kurowski v. Gorman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    ¶ 40 (App. 2008) (denying an attorney’s request for fees on appeal under § 14-3720 because the appeal was taken “for [the attorney’s] own benefit, not for the benefit of the estate”).
  • Russell Piccoli v. O'Donnell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • Russell Piccoli v. O'Donnell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    ¶12 The denial, burden, or obligation must result directly from the appealed judgment, decree, or order, “and not merely as a result in some other proceeding of the application of a legal principle established in the decree appealed from.” Roseman’s Estate, 68 Ariz. at 200, 203 P.2d at 868 (citation omitted); -52, ¶¶ 9- 10, -94 (App. 2008) (concluding that ordering a non-party to the appeal to pay interest and taxes from a bequest only indirectly affected the appellant even when there was a purp
  • Wade v. Mhp 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • Wade v. Mhp 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    “An appeal may only be taken by a party aggrieved by the judgment.” ¶ 9, see also ARCAP 1(d) (“Any party aggrieved by a judgment may appeal as provided under Arizona law and by these Rules.”).
  • Gersten v. Gersten 219 P.3d 309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • Criticized Gersten v. Gersten 219 P.3d 309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    ¶ 11 , ("When an alleged error applies to only one party who does not appeal, another party cannot make that argument on the non-appealing party’s behalf.”); ARCAP 1 ("An appeal may be taken by any party aggrieved by the judgment.”).