Cited by

see also County of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 62 (App. 2010) (breach); –61 (1977) (non- performance).

of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 53 (App. 2010) (citation omitted).

of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 11 (App. 2010) (“Waiver may be inferred from a party's actions that are inconsistent with intent to assert a right.”).

¶ 38 (App. 2010) (“Whether a party breached the covenant is a question of fact for the jury.”).

Consistent with this understanding, in another case involving § 12-820.01(A), this court stated that a “[c]ounty exercises its ‘legislative function’ by creating, defining, or regulating rights.”

See Great W. Bank v. LJC Dev., LLC, 479, 481–82, ¶¶ 7, 30, 41–42 (App. 2015) (holding evidence sufficient where market reports showed that construction borrower would have completed a profitable development had lender not wrongfully terminated financing); –08, ¶ 54 (App. 2010) (holding evidence sufficient where customer had previously made and performed on oral commitment, and reached terms with plaintiff’s successor and a similar company); (holding evidence insufficient where general data showe

See, e.g., Fleming, 237 Ariz. at 418–19 ¶¶ 18–20 (presumption applies to wrongful death claim); County of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., –03 ¶¶ 33–34 (App. 2010) (breach of contract, covenant of good faith and fair dealing); –45 ¶¶ 14–22 (App. 2008) (negligence); Schabel v. Deer Valley Unified Sch.

¶ 12 (App. 2010) (rejecting due process arguments because party “fail[ed] to demonstrate how it was unreasonably prejudiced by the deprivation”).

¶ 12 (App. 2010) (stating that due process error is not reversible absent prejudice).

¶ 16 (App. 2010) (“We construe the meaning of a contract provision from the language the parties used and in 9 GLENDALE v. VIESTE, et al. Decision of the Court view of all circumstances.”).

County of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 49 (App. 2010).

¶ 34 (App. 2010) (citing Doe ex rel.

¶ 12 (App. 2010); see also Brown v. U.S. Fid.

¶ 12 (App. 2010) (stating an appellate court will only reverse a due process error if it prejudiced a party); Gamboa, 223 Ariz. at 402-03, ¶¶ 17-18.

County of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 52 (App. 2010).

¶ 12 (App. 2010); Brown v. Ariz. Dep’t of Real Estate

County of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 49 (App. 2010).

of La Paz v. Yakima Compost Co., Inc., ¶ 49, (arguments not raised in trial court are waived on appeal); ¶ 16, (“The right to contest restitution can be waived.”).