Cited by

An agent can “only bind a principal within the scope of [the agent’s] authority, actual or apparent.” Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., – 11, ¶ 26 (App. 2011).

Ctr., ¶ 29 (App. 2010), and (2) waived any such argument by failing to object when Amica sought entry of judgment, see Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 17 n.3 (App. 2011).

See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., –12, ¶ 29 (App. 2011).

–65, ¶ 6 (2013) (“arguments not supported by adequate explanation, citations to the record, or authority” are waived); Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 17 (App. 2012) (appellate courts generally do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal).

v. Goodfarb, (noting that a corporation “can only act through its agents”); Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 26 (App. 2011) (as amended).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., –11 ¶ 26 (App. 2011).

See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 26 (App. 2011), as amended (Jan.

Cf. Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., n.6, ¶ 23 (App. 2011) (deeming a cross-appeal moot when affirming judgment for reasons underlying the superior court’s ruling); Catalina Foothills Unified Sch.

Moreover, even if a breach for failure to pay common area utilities existed, Argo admitted the increased rent payments made by Arik and accepted by RGO beginning in 2012 were to resolve any dispute between the parties over utilities, constituting an accord and satisfaction.13 See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 24

Owners Ass’n, Inc., n.8, ¶ 37 (App. 2015) (declining to address cross-appeal when affirming judgment on jury’s verdict); Best Choice Fund, L.L.C. v. Low & Childers, P.C., n.6, ¶ 23 (App. 2011) (deeming a cross-appeal moot when affirming judgment for the reasons underlying the trial court’s ruling).

An “accord and satisfaction discharges a contractual obligation or cause of action when the parties agree to exchange something of value in resolution of a claim or demand and then perform on that agreement, the accord being the agreement, and the satisfaction its execution or performance.” Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 24, ( ) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., -87 (App. 2011).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 10 (App. 2011).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 10

On appeal, “we determine de novo whether any genuine issues of material fact exist and whether the trial court properly applied the law.” Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., see also Ray Scottsdale Lumber Co. v. First Fed.

See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., , (holding that accrual of legal malpractice claim based on law firm's business formation, licensing, and regulatory compliance advice was not delayed by possibility that government entity that suspended plaintiff’s certificate of authority would reverse its position); Keonjian v. Olc

¶ 15 “The doctrine of accord and satisfaction discharges a contractual obligation or cause of action when the parties agree to exchange something of value in resolution of a claim or demand and then perform on that agreement, the accord being the agreement, and the satisfaction its execution or performance.” Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 24 , (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 281 (1981) (hereinafter “Restatement”)

¶15 A corporation’s agents may bind the corporate principal when acting “within the scope of their authority, actual or apparent.” Best Choice Fund, L.L.C. v. Low & Childers, P.C., -11, ¶ 26, -87 (App. 2011).

See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 17 n.3, n.3 (App. 2011) (not considering an issue raised “for the first time in a motion for reconsideration if the opposing party is deprived of an opportunity to respond with applicable evidence and arguments.” (citation omitted)).

See Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., , 508 ¶ 17 n. 3, , 684 n. 3 (App. 2011) (not considering an issue raised “for the first time in a motion for reconsideration if the opposing party is deprived of an opportunity to respond with applicable evidence and arguments.” (citation omitted)).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 10

“The trial court cannot be expected to glean a party’s arguments from a review of the evidence; the party must articulate its legal arguments.” Best Choice Fund, L.L.C. v. Low & Childers, P.C., n.3, ¶ 17, n.3 (App. 2011) (rejecting claim that issues were sufficiently raised because they were implicit in the affidavits).

At that time, damages are ‘irremedia[ble]’ or ‘irrevocable’ because no opportunity exists to eliminate them through a successful appeal.” Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 13, (citations omitted).

Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C., ¶ 10 , (as amended).