Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Dowling v. Stapley, 211 P.3d 1235.

76 citing documents.

Clout Construction v. Lb contracting/bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
Clout Construction v. Lb contracting/bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
-70 ¶ 57 (App. 2009) (citing cases).
In Re Dependency as to L.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Re Dependency as to L.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
§ 8-844(C)(1) (directing the court to make required findings when adjudicating a child dependent); ¶ 38 n.13 (App. 2009) (“Generally, subject matter jurisdiction of the superior court cannot be 5 IN RE DEPENDENCY AS TO L.P.
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to I.N. and N.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to I.N. and N.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
¶14 “Generally, a party must file a notice of appeal within thirty days of the entry of an appealable order pursuant to Arizona Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure (“ARCAP”) 9.” ¶ 39 (App. 2009).
Daniel Lachance, Henry Stephen Conroy v. County of Cochise Cochise County Jail District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
Daniel Lachance, Henry Stephen Conroy v. County of Cochise Cochise County Jail District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
n.13 (App. 2009) (“Generally, subject matter jurisdiction of the superior court cannot be waived.”).
Jurju v. Ile 534 P.3d 926 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Jurju v. Ile 534 P.3d 926 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶10 We have an independent obligation to examine our jurisdiction over an appeal, ¶ 5 (App. 2021), and lack jurisdiction over an untimely appeal, ¶ 39 (App. 2009).
State v. foothills/hanke Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. foothills/hanke Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
-74 ¶¶ 72-76 (App. 2009).
Avalon Hills v. Lang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Avalon Hills v. Lang Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Hon. mandell/matthews 509 P.3d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Hon. mandell/matthews 509 P.3d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Stephanie S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Stephanie S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jennifer G. v. Michael C., A.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jennifer G. v. Michael C., A.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Rozenman v. Blanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Rozenman v. Blanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 36 n.12 (App. 2009) ("[A]ppeal from the final judgment would include appeals from otherwise non-appealable interlocutory orders.").
Emmons v. Teleflex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Emmons v. Teleflex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 45 (App. 2009); Birth Hope Adoption Agency
Lindgren v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Lindgren v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
–75, ¶¶ 76, 78 (App. 2009); –81 (App. 1987).
Padron v. Maricopoly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Padron v. Maricopoly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Aea Federal v. Yuma Funding Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Aea Federal v. Yuma Funding Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 39 (App. 2009) (failure to timely appeal interlocutory order appointing a receiver precludes later challenge on direct appeal).
Mothershead v. Dulara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Mothershead v. Dulara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“An abuse of discretion occurs when there is no evidence to support a holding or the court commits an error of law when reaching a discretionary decision.” ¶ 45 (App. 2009).
Sheridan v. Swartz & Brough Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sheridan v. Swartz & Brough Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
A reviewing court does not “substitute [its] discretion for that of the trial court,” Marquez, 231 Ariz. at 441 ¶ 14, and the evidence is considered “in the light most favorable to upholding the superior court’s ruling,” ¶ 45 (App. 2009).
Heritage v. Weinberg 443 P.3d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Shores v. Diaz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Heritage v. Weinberg 443 P.3d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Shores v. Diaz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 45 (App. 2009); ¶ 17 (App. 2004) (noting that rulings under Rule 7.1 are reviewed for an abuse of discretion).
Reh v. Heikkinen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Reh v. Heikkinen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
“An abuse of discretion occurs when there is no evidence to support a holding or the court commits an error of law when reaching a discretionary decision.” ¶ 45 (App. 2009); see also Grant v. Ariz. Pub.
Compassionate Care Dispensary, Inc. v. Ariz. Dep't of Health Servs. 418 P.3d 978 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Compassionate Care Dispensary, Inc. v. Ariz. Dep't of Health Servs. 418 P.3d 978 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
See Dowling v. Stapley , , 264, ¶ 39, , 1248 (App. 2009).
Moon Valley v. Tegrous Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Moon Valley v. Tegrous Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“An abuse of discretion occurs when there is no evidence to support a holding or the court commits an error of law when reaching a discretionary decision.” ¶ 45 (App. 2009); see also Grant v. Ariz. Pub.
Felix v. Montes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Felix v. Montes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“An abuse of discretion occurs when there is no evidence to support a holding or the court commits an error of law when reaching a discretionary decision.” ¶ 45, see also Grant v. Ariz. Pub.
Jordan v. Hubbard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jordan v. Hubbard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ekweani v. Citimortgage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ekweani v. Citimortgage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
“An abuse of discretion occurs when there is no evidence to support a holding or the court commits an error of law when reaching a discretionary decision.” ¶ 45 (App. 2009).