Cited by

The resolution of that argument turns on application of statutory provisions, given that this court’s appellate jurisdiction “is defined, and limited, by the Legislature.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016) (citations omitted); accord Ariz. Const. art. 6, § 9 (“The jurisdiction, powers, duties and composition of any intermediate appellate court shall be as provided by law.”); ¶ 8 (App. 1 Absent material revisions after the relevant dates, statutes and rules cited refe

And including Rule 54(c) language “does not render an otherwise non- appealable order or judgment appealable[.]” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 6 (App. 2016).

Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

See Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 13 (App. 2016) (explaining a probate order is only appealable when it includes Rule 54 final judgment language).

See Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 1 (App. 2016).

See Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 19 (App. 2016) (“compliance with Rule 54(b) or 54(c) is not required for [appellate jurisdiction over] the rulings specified in A.R.S.

(holding, as matter of first impression, that order setting aside or refusing to vacate default judgment is appealable as special order made after final judgment); -76 (1987); Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., see also Ariz. R. Civ.

Rule 54(c) finality language “does not render an otherwise non-appealable order or judgment appealable as a final judgment.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, LLC, ¶ 6 (App. 2016).

P. 54(c); Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 6 (App. 2016).

Rule 54(c) finality language “does not render an otherwise non-appealable order or judgment appealable as a final judgment.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 6 (App. 2016).

See also Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 19 (App. 2016) (explaining that interlocutory orders, such as the refusal to grant an injunction, need not comply with Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule) 54(b) or 54(c) “to be appealable”).

§ 12-2101(A)(1) (2023); see also Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 21 (App. 2016).1 Tom’s notice of appeal cites A.R.S.

Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, LLC, ¶ 19 (App. 2016).

“This court’s appellate jurisdiction is defined, and limited, by the Legislature.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

“This court’s appellate jurisdiction is defined, and limited, by the Legislature.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

¶16 “This court’s appellate jurisdiction is defined, and limited, by the Legislature.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

See Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C, n.10 (App. 2016); see also A.R.S.

Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 15 (App. 2016).

This court’s appellate jurisdiction “is defined, and limited, by the Legislature.” Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 4 (App. 2016).

§ 12-2101(A)(2) and Brumett v. MGA Healthcare, L.L.C., -29 ¶¶ 14-15 (App. 2016) (“[C]ompliance with Rule 54(b) or 54(c) is not required for ‘any special order made after final judgment’ to be appealable under A.R.S.

See, e.g., Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 30 n.12 (App. 2016).

P. 23(f); Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, LLC, ¶ 22 (App. 2016).

Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 23 (App. 2016).

See Brumett v. MGA Home Healthcare, L.L.C., ¶ 14 (App. 2016).