DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite VICARI v. Lake Havasu City, 213 P.3d 367.

32 citing documents.

  • Saad v. Shinohara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Saad v. Shinohara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    ¶ 25 (App. 2009) (explaining “the court may award the successful party reasonable attorney fees” (quoting A.R.S.
  • Sandoval v. Oxford Financial Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Sandoval v. Oxford Financial Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    –25, ¶¶ 25–27 (App. 2009); ¶¶ 23–25 (App. 2007).
  • Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Dabrowski v. Bartlett 442 P.3d 811 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Dabrowski v. Bartlett 442 P.3d 811 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Valley Pride v. Ignite Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Valley Pride v. Ignite Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • State v. Mauceli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • State v. Mauceli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Ansley v. Banner Health 419 P.3d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Ansley v. Banner Health 419 P.3d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    ¶49 -24, ¶¶ 18-21 (App. 2009), for the proposition that the defendant is the prevailing party when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses the complaint.
  • Sonoran v. Bank of the West Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Sonoran v. Bank of the West Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    ¶ 9 (App. 2008) (defendant against whom a contract action is dismissed without prejudice is "successful party"); -25, ¶¶ 25-27 (App. 2009) (affirming fee award to defendant following voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)).
  • Navarro v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Navarro v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    NAVARRO v. GARCIA Decision of the Court CONCLUSION ¶8 The superior court did not abuse its discretion and we affirm the order establishing child support and the judgment as t
  • Evou v. All In Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
  • Evou v. All In Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
    -25, ¶¶ 26-27, 29, -74 (App. 2009) (finding that voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) did not preclude a § 12-341.01(A) fee award).
  • Kimball v. Perkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
  • Kimball v. Perkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
    ¶ 23 (App. 2009); Scottsdale Mem’l Health Sys.
  • Dobson v. McClennen 337 P.3d 568 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Dobson v. McClennen 337 P.3d 568 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    If ambiguity exists, the court applies “secondary principles of statutory construction and eonsider[s] other relevant information, including the history, context, and spirit and purpose of the law, to glean legislative intent.” , 222 ¶ 13, (citations omitted); , 198 ¶ 12
  • Rozenman v. Rozenman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Rozenman v. Rozenman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    Husband’s brief, however, conflates the concept of “jurisdiction” with “legal error.” -22, ¶ 12, -71 (App. 2009) (distinguishing “jurisdiction” as the power of the court to act, and “legal error” as whether the court acted correctly); see also State ex rel.
  • Johnson v. Cameron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Johnson v. Cameron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    However, we review the court’s decision to grant or deny a party’s requested attorneys’ fees for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 23, (citations omitted) (internal quotations omitted).
  • State v. Bayardi 281 P.3d 1063 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
  • State v. Bayardi 281 P.3d 1063 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
    “If ambiguity exists, we apply secondary principles of statutory construction and consider other relevant information, including the history, context, and spirit and purpose of the law, to glean legislative intent.” ¶ 13 , (citations omitted).
  • 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
    “If ambiguity exists, we apply secondary principles of statutory construction and consider other relevant information, including the history, context, and spirit and purpose of the law, to glean legislative intent.” ¶ 13 , (citations omitted).