Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Department of Corrections, 934 P.2d 801.

134 citing documents.

Pettit v. Pettit 189 P.3d 1102 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Pettit v. Pettit 189 P.3d 1102 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corrs.
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System v. Allen 173 P.3d 448 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System v. Allen 173 P.3d 448 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
§ 12-349(F); Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corr.
Pamela Manic v. Tucson City Attorney's Office Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Pamela Manic v. Tucson City Attorney's Office Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
See Phoenix 8 Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corrections, (“[W]e presume that the legislature does not enact superfluous or reiterative legislation.”).
State of Arizona v. Shipman Sweeney Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
State of Arizona v. Shipman Sweeney Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Burke v. A rizona State Retirement Sys., P.3d 444 (Ap p. 2003); Phoenix New spapers, Inc. v. D ep’t of Corr.
Johnson v. Mohave County 78 P.3d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Johnson v. Mohave County 78 P.3d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corr., Ariz., , Trantor, 179 Ariz. at 301 n. 1, 878 P.2d.
Burke v. Az State Retirement Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Burke v. Az State Retirement Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
See Motel 6 Operating Ltd. P’ P.2d 272 (App. 1999); Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corr., P.2d 801 (App. 1997).
Campbell v. SZL Properties, Ltd. 62 P.3d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Campbell v. SZL Properties, Ltd. 62 P.3d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corr.
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
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corrs.
Marriage of Donlann v. MacGurn 55 P.3d 74 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Marriage of Donlann v. MacGurn 55 P.3d 74 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
See Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corr.
City of Casa Grande v. Arizona Water Co. 20 P.3d 590 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
City of Casa Grande v. Arizona Water Co. 20 P.3d 590 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
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
¶ 19 GUSD also argues that, because courts presume that the legislature does not *103 enact superfluous statutes, see Phoenix Newspapers v. Dep’t of Corrections, , the qualified immunity afforded by A.R.S.
Motel 6 Operating Ltd. Partnership v. City of Flagstaff 991 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Motel 6 Operating Ltd. Partnership v. City of Flagstaff 991 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Herman v. City of Tucson 4 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Herman v. City of Tucson 4 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
See also Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Dep’t of Corrections, , (“[W]e presume that the legislature does not enact superfluous or reiterative legislation.”).
Lavidas v. Smith 987 P.2d 212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Lavidas v. Smith 987 P.2d 212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Yet, we must “presume that the legislature does not enact superfluous or reiterative legislation.” Phoenix Newspapers
Fisher Ex Rel. Fisher v. National General Insurance 965 P.2d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Fisher Ex Rel. Fisher v. National General Insurance 965 P.2d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Hall v. Lalli 952 P.2d 748 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Hall v. Lalli 952 P.2d 748 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 951 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 951 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by