Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Paloma Investment Ltd. Partnership v. Jenkins, 978 P.2d 110.

40 citing documents.

Stallings v. Stallings Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Stallings v. Stallings Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998) (appellate court will not consider new arguments raised for first time on appeal that were not presented to the superior court).
Brevetti v. Brevetti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Brevetti v. Brevetti Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998).
Liberti v. Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Liberti v. Scottsdale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998) (“New arguments may not be raised for the first time on appeal.”).
Shad C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Shad C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998)).
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998) (“New arguments may not be raised for the first time on appeal.”).
Simon v. Simon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Simon v. Simon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998).
Shawn B. v. Dcs, S.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Shawn B. v. Dcs, S.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17 (App. 1998)).
Carlos O. v. Dcs, C.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Carlos O. v. Dcs, C.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17, (“New arguments may not be raised for the first time on appeal.”) (citation omitted); see also K.B.
Aa American v. Lewandowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Aa American v. Lewandowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Ltd. P’AA American also argues “Lewandowski has not presented any rationale why the early filing of the renewal affidavit defeats the purpose of the statute.” This argument misses the point that it was AA American’s obligation, as the judgment creditor, to comply with the statutory renewal requirements.
Cooper v. Motta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Cooper v. Motta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Ltd. P’ ¶ 17, (noting that this court does not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal).
Koss Corp. v. American Express Co. 309 P.3d 898 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Koss Corp. v. American Express Co. 309 P.3d 898 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C. 203 P.3d 506 Ariz. 2009
Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C. 203 P.3d 506 Ariz. 2009
Ltd. P’ ¶ 22, ), and that because this right is a hereditament, it must be conveyed by deed, id.
South West Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Central Arizona Water Conservation District 212 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
South West Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Central Arizona Water Conservation District 212 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
138 n. 1, ¶ 22, , 115 n. 1 (App.1998)).
Strawberry Water Co. v. Paulsen 207 P.3d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Strawberry Water Co. v. Paulsen 207 P.3d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Ltd. P’ ¶ 22 , and thus cannot be converted because they are not chattels, 1 Dan B. Dobbs, The Law of Torts § 63, at 130 (2001).
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
¶ 17 , ("New arguments may not be raised for the first time on appeal.”).
Kimu P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 178 P.3d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Kimu P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 178 P.3d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
¶ 17 , ("New arguments may not be raised for the first time on appeal.").
Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C. 174 P.3d 298 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C. 174 P.3d 298 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Liristis v. American Family Mutual Insurance 61 P.3d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Liristis v. American Family Mutual Insurance 61 P.3d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
West Maricopa Combine, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 26 P.3d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
West Maricopa Combine, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 26 P.3d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Ltd. P’ , (discussing a water rights agreement as a property right capable of conveyance separate from the land).