Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System v. Bentley, 928 P.2d 653.

49 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. James Hamberlin 515 P.3d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
State of Arizona v. James Hamberlin 515 P.3d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
v. Bentley, (“Statutes must be given a sensible construction that accomplishes the legislative intent and which avoids absurd results.”).
State v. Furlong 473 P.3d 707 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Furlong 473 P.3d 707 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
v. Bentley, (“Statutes must be given a sensible construction that accomplishes the legislative intent and which avoids absurd results.” ()).
State v. Tagge 442 P.3d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Tagge 442 P.3d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Whitmer v. Hilton Casitas 425 P.3d 253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Whitmer v. Hilton Casitas 425 P.3d 253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
v. Bentley, (“The scope of an agency’s power is measured by statute and may not be expanded by agency fiat.”) (citation omitted).
Merrick v. Penzone Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Merrick v. Penzone Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions 367 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Cemex Construction Materials South, LLC v. Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. 349 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
Cemex Construction Materials South, LLC v. Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. 349 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
v. Bentley, (courts must give statutes sensible constructions and avoid absurd results).
AEA Federal Credit Union v. Yuma Funding, Inc. 346 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
AEA Federal Credit Union v. Yuma Funding, Inc. 346 P.3d 991 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Moreover, “‘[statutes must be given a sensible construction that accomplishes the legislative intent and which avoids absurd results.’” ¶ 13 , ( , ).
Kobold v. Aetna Life Insurance 309 P.3d 924 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Kobold v. Aetna Life Insurance 309 P.3d 924 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
we considered the right of subrogation in favor of Arizona’s Medicaid program created by AR.S.
Summers Group, Inc. v. Tempe Mechanical, LLC 299 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Summers Group, Inc. v. Tempe Mechanical, LLC 299 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Arizona Department of Adminstration v. Cox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Arizona Department of Adminstration v. Cox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
v. Bentley, see also City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., (when 5 interpreting particular term, “‘we apply a practical and commonsensical construction’”), quoting Douglass v. Gendr
Thompson v. Thompson 176 P.3d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Thompson v. Thompson 176 P.3d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
v. Bentley, , ) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Tissicino and Nielson v. Peterson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
Tissicino and Nielson v. Peterson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
“We review the propriety of summary judgment de novo.”
Reinke v. Alliance Towing 88 P.3d 1154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Reinke v. Alliance Towing 88 P.3d 1154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Facilitec Inc v. J Elliott Hibbs 80 P.3d 765 Ariz. 2003
Facilitec Inc v. J Elliott Hibbs 80 P.3d 765 Ariz. 2003
v. Bentley, 187 Ariz. 229, 232, (stating that “‘[t]he scope of an agency’s power is measured by statute and may not be expanded by agency fiat’”) (citing Cochise County v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment Sys., 170 Ariz. 443, 445
State v. Gonzales 80 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State v. Gonzales 80 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Eaton v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System 79 P.3d 1044 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Eaton v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System 79 P.3d 1044 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
v. Bentley, , 231 n. 1, , 655 n. 1 (App.1996).
Better Homes Construction, Inc. v. Goldwater 53 P.3d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Better Homes Construction, Inc. v. Goldwater 53 P.3d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Andrews v. Samaritan Health System 36 P.3d 57 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Andrews v. Samaritan Health System 36 P.3d 57 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
v. Bentley, , (citation omitted).
State v. Affordable Bail Bonds 6 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Affordable Bail Bonds 6 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Andress v. City of Chandler 7 P.3d 121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Andress v. City of Chandler 7 P.3d 121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
(finding that “[statutes must be given a sensible construction that accomplishes the legislative intent and which avoids absurd results”).
Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance v. Barerra 998 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance v. Barerra 998 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Arizona State Board of Regents Ex Rel. Arizona State University v. Arizona State Personnel Board 985 P.2d 1032 Ariz. 1999
Arizona State Board of Regents Ex Rel. Arizona State University v. Arizona State Personnel Board 985 P.2d 1032 Ariz. 1999
LaBombard v. Samaritan Health System 991 P.2d 246 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
LaBombard v. Samaritan Health System 991 P.2d 246 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Chicago Insurance v. Manterola 955 P.2d 982 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Chicago Insurance v. Manterola 955 P.2d 982 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
see also Hudnell v. Allstate Ins.