Cited by

¶ 41 (App. 2018) (explaining that when a party fails "to provide us with authority or argument to award attorney's fees on appeal, we deny the [party's] request").

“[A] dismissal without prejudice is only appealable if the dismissal results in finality.” ¶ 19 (App. 2018); see also A.R.S.

¶ 29 (App. 2018) (internal quotations and citations omitted).

¶ 31 (App. 2018) (explaining that “[i]mpracticable does not mean impossible, but rather that service would be ‘extremely difficult or inconvenient’”).

Both rely on the principle “that an appeal generally divests the trial court of jurisdiction to proceed except in furtherance of the appeal.” ¶ 18 (App. 2018).

¶ 15 (App. 2018) ( ¶ 9 (App. 2018)).

5 LAW v. HERNANDEZ Decision of the Court ¶14 “Proper, effective service on a defendant is a prerequisite to a court’s exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendant.” ¶ 29 (App. 2018) (citation omitted).

¶ 31 (App. 2018) (citation omitted).

–12, ¶ 38 (App. 2018); Carrington Mortg.

¶ 29 (App. 2018) (“Proper, effective service on a defendant is a prerequisite to a court’s exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendant.” ( ¶ 4 (App. 2005))).

–8, ¶ 20 (App. 2018) (recognizing when this court declines “jurisdiction to hear an appeal based on the lack of a final appealable order[,] .

¶ 19 (App. 2018) (“[A] dismissal without prejudice is only appealable if the dismissal results in finality.”).

¶ 36 (App. 2018) (noting that prior decisions may be overruled by changes to applicable law).

Shepherd v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 246 Ariz. 1 On appeal, Harris also alleges that without the agreed-upon efforts to dismiss the criminal case, “there was no consideration for [Harris] dismissing his civil case against [the Mathewses].” This argument overlooks the agreement provisions in which Harold agreed to release his judgment against Harris and agreed to