Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Berenter v. Gallinger, 839 P.2d 1120.

50 citing documents.

Allen v. Adot Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Allen v. Adot Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Cobia v. Abon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Cobia v. Abon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
DeGroot v. Ariz. Racing Comm’n, - 36 (App. 1984); (“The purpose of judicial review of an administrative decision is not to decide whether the record supports appellant’s version of the facts.”).
Woodward v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Woodward v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶33 Woodward has failed to rebut the presumption that a hearing officer is “fair and can be disqualified only upon a showing of actual bias.” Jenners v. Indus.
State v. Fisher Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fisher Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
It does not require “perfect notice, absolute precision, or impossible standards.”
Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
6 SHAH v. AZ BRD DENTAL EXAM Decision of the Court at stake, and the risk that the procedure will lead to erroneous results.” (citing Maricopa Cnty.
Emmett McLoughlin Realty, Inc. v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Emmett McLoughlin Realty, Inc. v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Smith v. Arizona Long Term Care System 84 P.3d 482 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Smith v. Arizona Long Term Care System 84 P.3d 482 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Eastern Vanguard Forex Ltd. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 79 P.3d 86 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Eastern Vanguard Forex Ltd. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 79 P.3d 86 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Better Homes Constr., ¶ 15
State v. Kaiser 65 P.3d 463 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State v. Kaiser 65 P.3d 463 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
A legislative enactment “is not void for vagueness ‘simply because it may be difficult to determine how far one can go before the statute is violated.’ ” McLamb, 188 Ariz. at 5 , 932 P.2d at 270 (quoting Phillips, 178 Ariz. at 370 , 873 P.2d at 708 )( , ).
Jones v. County of Coconino 35 P.3d 422 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Jones v. County of Coconino 35 P.3d 422 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Shaffer v. Arizona State Liquor Board 4 P.3d 460 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Shaffer v. Arizona State Liquor Board 4 P.3d 460 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
3613 Ltd. v. Department of Liquor Licenses & Control 978 P.2d 1282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
3613 Ltd. v. Department of Liquor Licenses & Control 978 P.2d 1282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
(citing Havasu Heights Ranch and Dev.
Nutek Information Systems, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 977 P.2d 826 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Nutek Information Systems, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 977 P.2d 826 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Carondelet Health Servs., 182 Ariz. at 504 , 897 P.2d at 1390
Johnson v. Mofford 975 P.2d 130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Johnson v. Mofford 975 P.2d 130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
See, , (applying standard of review of administrative decisions).
State v. Lefevre 972 P.2d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
State v. Lefevre 972 P.2d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
“A statute that ‘gives fair notice of conduct to be avoided is not void for vagueness simply because it may be difficult to determine how far one can go before the statute is violated.’” , ( , ).
Siler v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 972 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Siler v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 972 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Pima County v. Pima County Merit System Commission 944 P.2d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Pima County v. Pima County Merit System Commission 944 P.2d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
State v. McLamb 932 P.2d 266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
State v. McLamb 932 P.2d 266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
If a statute gives notice of prohibited conduct, it is not void for vagueness “simply because it may be difficult to determine how far one can go before the statute is violated.” Phillips, 178 Ariz. at 370 , 873 P.2d at 708 ( , ).
Culpepper v. State 930 P.2d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Culpepper v. State 930 P.2d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Lathrop v. Arizona Board of Chiropractic Examiners 894 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Lathrop v. Arizona Board of Chiropractic Examiners 894 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
as an “undercover investigator for Channel 10 news.” “Pleadings before an administrative agency are liberally construed and there may be no subsequent challenge of an issue which was actually litigated if there has been reasonable notice and an opportunity to cure surprise.”
Carondelet Health Services v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 897 P.2d 1388 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Carondelet Health Services v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 897 P.2d 1388 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Brown v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 890 P.2d 615 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Brown v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 890 P.2d 615 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Phillips 873 P.2d 706 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Phillips 873 P.2d 706 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
A statute that “gives fair notice of conduct to be avoided is not void for vagueness simply because it may be difficult to determine how far one can go before the statute is violated.”
Cactus Wren Partners v. Arizona Department of Building & Fire Safety 869 P.2d 1212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Cactus Wren Partners v. Arizona Department of Building & Fire Safety 869 P.2d 1212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
(citing Havasu Heights Ranch and Development Corporation v. Desert Valley Wood Products, Inc., , ).
State v. Martin 847 P.2d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Martin 847 P.2d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992