Cited by

Of Educ., ¶ 65 (App. 1998) (equal protection principles “require that all persons in a given class be treated equally and that the classification is reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious.”).

of Educ., ¶ 65 (App. 1998).

of Educ., ¶ 1 (App. 1998) (reversing where court could not discern basis for decision).

of Educ., ¶ 48 (App. 1998).

of Educ., ¶ 21 (App. 1998) (“[T]he reviewing court must be able to discern how the agency reached its conclusion.”).

of Educ., ¶ 21 (App. 1998) (explaining how even when § 41-1063 applies “[t]he findings need not be detailed nor in any particular form, though the reviewing court must be able to discern how the agency reached its conclusion”).

of Educ., ¶ 55 , (“Due process protection vests only when a person has a property interest that is protectible.”).

of Educ., ¶ 48 , (finding that the creditworthiness requirement for awarding charter school status was “merely an element to be considered by the Board” when making its decision and only “a method of obtaining data”); cf. Sw.

¶ 32 The County responds that Bennett did not have a vested right to use the Courthouse Plaza on the same weekend each year, and “nothing the Board of Supervisors did created a legitimate entitlement interest.” , the County argues that the language of the 1992 Ordinance did not create a property interest in any event sponsor, and although the Board approved the Festival for preferential treatment it did not commit the County to do so in future years.

of Educ., ¶ 24, ¶ 24 (App. 1998).

of Educ., ¶ 65 , (applying state and federal clauses and holding that the state did not violate equal protection by requiring a credit check of charter school applicants but not of employees of non-charter public schools).

¶ 7 , a case involving the denial of a school charter by the Arizona State Board of Education.