Cited by

Waste Mgmt., Inc., –43 (App. 1990).

See M & M Auto Storage Pool, Inc. v. Chemical Waste Mgmt., Inc.

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (concluding a ruling on a motion to set aside a final judgment under Civil Rule 60(b), analogous to a Rule 85 motion, is appealable under § 12-2101(A)(2) as a special order made after final judgment).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (grant or denial of a motion to set aside judgment appealable as a special order made after final judgment, A.R.S.

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (noting an order denying a motion to vacate a judgment is appealable as a “special order made after final judgment”).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying or 4 NATIONAL TAX, et al. v. SWEENEY Decision of the Court granting a motion to set aside a judgment .

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment under Rule 60(c), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, is appealable as a ‘special order made after final judgment.’”).1 ¶10 The Tohatans contend the superior court committed legal and jurisdictional error.

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment .

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment .

Waste Mgmt., Inc., , a l’uling on a motion to set aside a final default judgment, , and other post-judgment rulings relating to a final judgment, -27 , (“To be appealable, a po

Waste Mgmt., Inc., a ruling on a motion to set aside a final default judgment, and other post-judgment rulings relating to a final judgment, -27 (App. 1995) (“To be appealable, a post-judgment order must fulfill two requiremen

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying .

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (“An order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment under Rule 60(c) .

Waste Mgmt., Inc., –41, –67 (App. 1990) (addressing appealability of order setting aside prior order of dismissal).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (order denying motion to set aside under Rule 60(c) appealable as a “special order made after final judgment”).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (holding an order denying a motion to set aside a judgment is appealable as a “special order made after final judgment”) (citations omitted).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (stating without qualification that an order granting or denying a motion to set aside a judgment under Ariz. R. Civ.

Waste Mgmt., Inc., (discussing comparable Rule 60(c), Ariz. R. Civ.

Waste Mgmt., Inc., , (“An order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment under Rule 60(c), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, is appealable as a ‘special order made after final judgment.’ ”).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., , (holding that an order denying or granting a motion to set aside a judgment pursuant to Rule 60(e) is appealable as a special order made after final judgment).

Waste Mgmt., Inc., quoting § 12-2101(C).

M & M Auto Storage Pool, Inc. v. Chemical Waste Mgmt., Inc.

the required deferential standard of review.”5 The county also maintains “[t]he Merit Commission had no authority to revoke the discipline.” We review de novo the superior court’s ruling affirming the Commission’s decision and “may substitute our opinion for that of the superior court because we are reviewing the same record.” See M & M Auto Storage Pool, Inc. v. Chemical Waste Mgmt., Inc., see also Pima County v. Pima County Merit Sys.

See M & M Auto Storage Pool, Inc. v. Chemical Waste Mgmt., Inc., , (“[W]e may substitute our opinion for that of the superior court because we are reviewing the same record.”); see also Ariz. Dep’t of Corr.