Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Fairway Constructors, Inc. v. Ahern, 970 P.2d 954.

26 citing documents.

Lakeside v. Meyers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lakeside v. Meyers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Skydive Arizona, Inc. v. Hogue 360 P.3d 153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Skydive Arizona, Inc. v. Hogue 360 P.3d 153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Fairway Constructors, , 124 ¶ 9
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Compare Fairway Constructors, ¶¶ 8–9, (finding plaintiff’s unfair-competition claim preempted by federal copyright law, and noting that such a claim is “based on principles of equity” and “encompasses several tort theories,” including “misappropriation”), with Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition § 1 cmt.
Old Republic National Title Insurance v. New Falls Corp. 233 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Old Republic National Title Insurance v. New Falls Corp. 233 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
¶ 2 , Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
Bennett James L. Bennett Money Purchase Pension Plan Meyerstein v. Baxter Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Bennett James L. Bennett Money Purchase Pension Plan Meyerstein v. Baxter Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
even when there is no contractual relationship between the parties at all.”); Fairway Constructors, -58 (App. 1998) (unfair competition arises out of tort); Bar J (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”); W. Techs., Inc. v. Sverdrup & Parcel, Inc., 7
Industrial Commission v. Old Republic Insurance 219 P.3d 285 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Industrial Commission v. Old Republic Insurance 219 P.3d 285 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
¶ 14 , (citing Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6 , ).
Burk v. State 156 P.3d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Burk v. State 156 P.3d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
Kromko v. Arizona Board of Regents 146 P.3d 1016 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Kromko v. Arizona Board of Regents 146 P.3d 1016 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
¶ 78 , Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
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
Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
Jeter v. Mayo Clinic Arizona 121 P.3d 1256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Jeter v. Mayo Clinic Arizona 121 P.3d 1256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Baker v. Rolnick 110 P.3d 1284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Baker v. Rolnick 110 P.3d 1284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
See Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
State v. Sorkhabi 46 P.3d 1071 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Sorkhabi 46 P.3d 1071 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
DISCUSSION ¶ 5 ‘We conduct de novo review of an order dismissing a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” Fairway Constructors, ¶ 6
Hill v. Peterson 25 P.3d 19 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
Hill v. Peterson 25 P.3d 19 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by