Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Ritchie v. Krasner, 211 P.3d 1272.

289 citing documents.

State v. Coven 340 P.3d 1101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See ARCAP 13(a)(6) (requiring argument in appellate brief contain “citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied upon”); ¶ 62, (deeming waived an issue unsupported by legal authority).
Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
vacating, modifying or otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice.”); ARCAP 13(a)(6) (requiring argument in appellate brief contain “citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied upon”); ¶ 62, (deeming waived an issue unsupported by legal authority).
Dominguez v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Dominguez v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 62, (holding the failure to comply with ARCAP Rule 13 can constitute waiver of that claim).
Caskey v. Battani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Caskey v. Battani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 62, (citation omitted).
Doyle v. Bashas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Doyle v. Bashas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶¶ 28-29, (holding jury did not err in finding physician’s misdiagnosis was partially the proximate cause of decedent’s fatal overdose of pain medication used to treat the overlooked condition); -81, ¶¶ 24-26, -61 (App. 2004) (d
Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc. 322 P.3d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc. 322 P.3d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Co., SANDRETTO v. PAYSON HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, INC. Opinion of the Court 1287 (App. 2009) (trial court in “best position” to determine whether misconduct materially affected rights of other party).
In Re Estate of Richard R. Snure 320 P.3d 316 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In Re Estate of Richard R. Snure 320 P.3d 316 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
App. P. 13(a)(6) (opening brief “shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on”); (failure to comply with Rule 13(a)(6) waives argument).
Edwards v. Magnus Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Edwards v. Magnus Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
P. 13(a)(6); ¶ 62, (noting that the failure to cite to authority, statutes and parts of the record relied upon may constitute abandonment and waiver of a claim).
Taylor-Bertling v. Foley 313 P.3d 537 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Taylor-Bertling v. Foley 313 P.3d 537 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (Civil) Preliminary 7; ER.
Thiele v. City of Phoenix 301 P.3d 206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Thiele v. City of Phoenix 301 P.3d 206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C. 276 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C. 276 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
-04, ¶ 54 , -88 (App.2009) ("Courts give counsel 1 "wide latitude” in closing arguments to "comment on the evidence and argue all reasonable inferences” from it.’ ” (citations omitted)); accord United States v. Parker, 549 F.2d 1217, 1222 (9th Cir.1977) (holding that because counsel did not "mis
NICKERSON v. GREEN VALLEY RECREATION, INC. 265 P.3d 1108 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
NICKERSON v. GREEN VALLEY RECREATION, INC. 265 P.3d 1108 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
App. P. 13(a)(6); ¶¶ 61-62
Cohen v. Maricopa County 263 P.3d 61 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Cohen v. Maricopa County 263 P.3d 61 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
See, ¶ 11 , Patterson v. Thunder Pass, Inc., ¶¶ 9-10
State v. Hunter 260 P.3d 1107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State v. Hunter 260 P.3d 1107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Wickham v. Hopkins 250 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Wickham v. Hopkins 250 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
“The existence of a duty is a question of law that we review de novo.” Diaz v. Phoenix Lubrication Serv., Inc., ¶ 12 , ( ¶ 11 , ).
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
The discovery rule tolls limitations "until the plaintiff possesses a minimum knowledge sufficient to recognize that a `wrong occurred and caused injury.'" ¶ 57 , ( ¶ 22 , ).
Desert Mountain Properties Ltd. Partnership v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance 236 P.3d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Desert Mountain Properties Ltd. Partnership v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance 236 P.3d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
¶ 62 , see A Tumbling-T Ranches, 222 Ariz. at 529, ¶34 , 217 P.3d at 1234 (it is not the responsibility of this court to search the record for authorities that support parties' arguments).
Yeung v. MARIC 232 P.3d 1281 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Yeung v. MARIC 232 P.3d 1281 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
¶ 23 P.3d 1272 (App.2009), in a supplemental citation of authority.
Salica v. Tucson Heart Hospital - Carondelet, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Salica v. Tucson Heart Hospital - Carondelet, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
¶¶ 9, 23, 1281-82 (App. 2009), 8 “The plaintiff does not need „to introduce evidence to establish that the negligence resulted in the injury or the death, but simply that the negligence increased the risk of injury or death
Diaz v. PHOENIX LUBRICATION SERVICE, INC. 230 P.3d 718 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Diaz v. PHOENIX LUBRICATION SERVICE, INC. 230 P.3d 718 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010