Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Schabel v. DEER VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL, 920 P.2d 41.

99 citing documents.

Tavilla v. Blue Cross Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
No. 97, (“Issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are waived.” ( )).
Stratton v. Weaver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
No. 97, (“Issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are deemed waived.”).
Patterson v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Steinberger v. McVey 318 P.3d 419 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
No. 97, , 167, , 47 (App. 1996).
Alpha, LLC v. Dartt 304 P.3d 1126 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
No. 97, , 167, , 47 (App.1996) (issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are waived); MT Builders, L.L.C. v. Fisher Roofing, Inc., , 304 n. 7, ¶ 19, , 765 n.7 (App. 2008) (arguments not developed on appeal are waived).
Belen Loan Investors, LLC v. Myers, Baumgardner, Los Luna Highlands 296 P.3d 984 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Belen Loan Investors, LLC v. Myers, Baumgardner, Los Luna Highlands 296 P.3d 984 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Ryan v. San Francisco Peaks Trucking Co. 262 P.3d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Ryan v. San Francisco Peaks Trucking Co. 262 P.3d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
No. 97, , (“By failing to raise the issue ...
Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. American Ass'n of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists 257 P.3d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. American Ass'n of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists 257 P.3d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A. 261 P.3d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A. 261 P.3d 445 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
No. 97, , (“Issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are waived.”).
Marriage of MacMillan v. Schwartz 250 P.3d 1213 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Marriage of MacMillan v. Schwartz 250 P.3d 1213 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
No. 97, , (holding issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are waived).
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Estate of Braden Ex Rel. Gabaldon v. State 238 P.3d 1265 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Estate of Braden Ex Rel. Gabaldon v. State 238 P.3d 1265 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In Re Mh 2008-002393 221 P.3d 1054 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
In Re Mh 2008-002393 221 P.3d 1054 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control District 217 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control District 217 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
No. 97, , (absolute immunity protects government from almost limitless liability that arises from the extensive power to act for the public good but does so at the cost of inequitable results for individual plaintiffs).
Ritchie v. Krasner 211 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Ritchie v. Krasner 211 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
MT BUILDERS, LLC v. Fisher Roofing Inc. 197 P.3d 758 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
No. 97, , 167, , 47 (App. 1996) ("Issues not clearly raised and argued in a party’s appellate brief are waived.”).
Tostado v. City of Lake Havasu 204 P.3d 1044 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Dist., , 164, , 44 (App.1996).
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Wolfinger v. Cheche 80 P.3d 783 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Wolfinger v. Cheche 80 P.3d 783 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Gunnell v. Arizona Public Service Co. 18 P.3d 176 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Gunnell v. Arizona Public Service Co. 18 P.3d 176 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Keggi v. Northbrook Property & Casualty Insurance 13 P.3d 785 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
No. 97, , 167, , 47 (App. 1996) (issues not clearly raised and argued in party’s appellate brief are waived); Ness v. Western Sec.
Childress Buick Co. v. O'CONNELL 11 P.3d 413 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Childress Buick Co. v. O'CONNELL 11 P.3d 413 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
RECORP PARTNERS v. Gust Rosenfeld, PLC 8 P.3d 418 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
RECORP PARTNERS v. Gust Rosenfeld, PLC 8 P.3d 418 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
No. 97, , (issues not clearly raised and argued in party's appellate brief are waived).
Doe v. State 7 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Doe v. State 7 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Johnson v. McDonald 3 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Johnson v. McDonald 3 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
No. 97, , 162 n. 1, , 42 n. 1 (App.1996).
Fidelity Security Life Insurance v. State 954 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1998
Fidelity Security Life Insurance v. State 954 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1998
Diaz v. Magma Copper Co. 950 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Diaz v. Magma Copper Co. 950 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
No. 97, , (distinguishing policy level decision to provide playground equipment from operational level decision whether to eliminate safety hazard); Warrington v. Tempe Elementary School District No. 3, , (school district’s placement of bus stop an operational decision not entitl
Fidelty Security Life Insurance v. State 935 P.2d 861 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Sanchez v. City of Tucson 943 P.2d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Sanchez v. City of Tucson 943 P.2d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
See Schabel v. Deer Valley Unified School District No. 97, , (distinguishing policy-making decisions from operational level decisions)

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by