DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Arpaio v. Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, 238 P.3d 626.

28 citing documents.

  • PETERSEN v. FONTES Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • PETERSEN v. FONTES Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (quoting Sedona Priv.
  • Umb Bank v. Parkview Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • Umb Bank v. Parkview Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    of Supervisors, –62, ¶¶ 3, 11–12 (App. 2010) (holding that notice of claim statute applied to claims for injunctive relief and declaratory judgment based on public entities’ unlawful seizure of funds “to the extent the [plaintiff] then would seek recovery of some or all of the [funds]” from the state and to the extent that “[p]re
  • Yellowman v. Vanderwey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Yellowman v. Vanderwey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    of Supervisors, ¶ 11 (App. 2010) (a claimant seeking declaratory relief resulting in recovery of funds from a governmental entity required to comply with the notice-of-claim statute).
  • Burns v. Apsc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Burns v. Apsc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    of Supervisors, ¶ 14 (App. 2010) (exercising discretion to hear an otherwise moot appeal because “a decision on the substantive issues could affect similar future legislative acts”).
  • Bowles v. Trznadel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Bowles v. Trznadel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (holding that an issue “becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties”).
  • Munguia v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Munguia v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (“A case becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties.”) (quotation omitted); ¶¶ 8-9 (App. 2014) (holding that plaintiff’s claim against the sheriff’s of
  • Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (“A case becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties.”) (quotation omitted).
  • Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (citation omitted) (“A case becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties.”).
  • Alan C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Alan C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 (App. 2010) (“A case becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties.”).
  • Melinda S. Workman v. Verde Wellness Center, Inc. 382 P.3d 812 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
  • Melinda S. Workman v. Verde Wellness Center, Inc. 382 P.3d 812 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
  • Hope v. Renaud Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • Hope v. Renaud Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7, (providing that a case “becomes moot when an event occurs which would cause the outcome of the appeal to have no practical effect on the parties”).
  • Industrial Commission v. Brewer 290 P.3d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
  • Industrial Commission v. Brewer 290 P.3d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
    of Supervisors, ¶ 23 , ( ¶ 5 , ).
  • Bt Capital, LLC v. Td Service Co. 265 P.3d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
  • Bt Capital, LLC v. Td Service Co. 265 P.3d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
    of Supervisors, ¶ 7 , (quoting Sedona Private Prop.
  • ARIZONA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION v. Brewer 243 P.3d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • ARIZONA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION v. Brewer 243 P.3d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
    of Supervisors, ¶¶ 16-17