Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Ashton-Blair v. Merrill, 928 P.2d 1244.

56 citing documents.

Victor Sanchez-Ravuelta Janette Dodge v. Yavapai County Town of Dewey-Humboldt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
Victor Sanchez-Ravuelta Janette Dodge v. Yavapai County Town of Dewey-Humboldt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
9 6 ¶21 The plaintiffs also argue that their notices of claim complied with § 12-821.01(A) because they contained “just enough” facts to allow the defendants to investigate liability—something the plaintiffs allege the defendants chose not to do.
Torres v. Jai Dining Services Ariz. 2023
Torres v. Jai Dining Services Ariz. 2023
Ariz. at 3 ¶ 9 n.3 (“Although negligence suits certainly have their basis in common law, governments generally enjoyed sovereign immunity from suits sounding in tort, a tradition that carried over to this 29 TORRES, ET AL V. JAI DINING VICE CHIEF JUSTICE TIMMER, Dissenting country.”); (“Common law immunities .
Li v. Zhao Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Li v. Zhao Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 18 (App. 2015) (“[T]he family court is in the best position to judge the credibility of witnesses.”); (holding that when the appellate record is incomplete, “we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision”).
Jp Morgan v. Adams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jp Morgan v. Adams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
(“As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the superior court supported its decision.”).
Secure Ventures v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Secure Ventures v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 8 n.1 (App. 2005); (“We may only consider the matters in the record before us.”).
Stuart v. Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Stuart v. Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
“We may only consider the matters in the record before us. As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the superior court supported its decision.” Burcham Ave, 204 Ariz. at 405, ¶ 11 ().
Price v. Slayden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Price v. Slayden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Co., ¶ 36 (App. 1998) (“We do not reweigh evidence or determine the credibility of witnesses.”); (“We may only consider the matters in the record before us.”).
Denboer v. Abpe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Denboer v. Abpe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
“We may only consider the matters in the record before us. As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision.”
State v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
D'Anna P. v. Dcs, A.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
D'Anna P. v. Dcs, A.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
("We may only consider the matters in the record before us. As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision.").
Ekweani v. Citimortgage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ekweani v. Citimortgage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Although we decline to strike the statement of facts on that basis, we rely on the answering brief and our review of the record for our recitation of the facts and procedural background.
Atkinson v. McIndoo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Atkinson v. McIndoo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See In re Property Located at 6757 S. Burcham Ave., ¶ 11, ( ).
Armed Forces v. Namvar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Armed Forces v. Namvar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
“As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision.”
Medley v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Medley v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶14 “As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision.”
In Re Estate of Winn 237 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In Re Estate of Winn 237 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
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
“Wé may only consider the matters in the record before us.”
Advanced Cardiac Specialists, Chartered v. Tri-City Cardiology Consultants, P.C. 214 P.3d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Advanced Cardiac Specialists, Chartered v. Tri-City Cardiology Consultants, P.C. 214 P.3d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
[I]n the context of defamation actions, the term absolute privilege is interchangeable with the term absolute immunity.” , 317 n. 2, , 1246 n. 2 (App. 1996) (citation omitted).
Gravel Resources of Arizona v. Hills 170 P.3d 282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Gravel Resources of Arizona v. Hills 170 P.3d 282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
(“[W]e strike the Statement of Facts contained in the answering brief for failing to cite a single record reference.”).
Ledvina v. Cerasani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Ledvina v. Cerasani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Similarly, -18, -47 (App. 1996), the court concluded that an attorney’s defamatory statements made in response to a complaint to the State Bar were shielded by absolute immunity.
Sobol v. Marsh 130 P.3d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Marsh 130 P.3d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Alarcon 131 P.3d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Sobol v. Alarcon 131 P.3d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
-59, ¶ 4 , -23 (App.1999)
Property Located at 6757 S. Burcham Ave. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Property Located at 6757 S. Burcham Ave. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
“We may only consider the matters in the record before us. As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record before the trial court supported its decision.”
State v. Olcan 61 P.3d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State v. Olcan 61 P.3d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Schmitz v. Aston 3 P.3d 1184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Schmitz v. Aston 3 P.3d 1184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Burns v. Davis 993 P.2d 1119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Burns v. Davis 993 P.2d 1119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
317 n. 2, , 1246 n. 2 (App.1996) (terms of absolute privilege and absolute immunity are interchangeable).