Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources, 118 P.3d 1110.

30 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Timothy Edward Egan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
State of Arizona v. Timothy Edward Egan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
See Canas v. Bay Ent., LLC, (Dictum is a “judicial comment made during the course of delivering a judicial opinion, but one that is unnecessary to the decision in the case and therefore not precedential.” (quoting Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., n.9 (App. 2005))).
Canas v. Bay Entertainment Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Canas v. Bay Entertainment Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
is ‘[a] judicial comment made during the course of delivering a judicial opinion, but one that is unnecessary to the decision in the case and therefore not precedential (although it may be considered persuasive).’” Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., ¶ 22 n.9 (App. 2005) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1100 (2d Pocket Ed. 2001)).
Whiles v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Whiles v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
at 534; see also Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Resources, ¶ 21 n.9 (App. 2005) (“‘Obiter dictum’ .
Aaron W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Aaron W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“Obiter dictum,” on the other hand, is “[a] judicial comment made during the course of delivering a judicial opinion, but one that is unnecessary to the decision in the case and therefore not precedential (although it may be considered persuasive).” Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t. Water Res., ¶ 22, n.9 (App. 2005) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 490–91 (2d Pocket ed. 2001)).
State v. Farnsworth 389 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
State v. Farnsworth 389 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Polk, , 372 P.3d at 933 ; see also Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., n.9 , , 1116 n.9 (App. 2006) (explaining difference between judicial and obiter dicta).
In Re Pinal County Mental Health No. Mh-201000029 240 P.3d 1262 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
In Re Pinal County Mental Health No. Mh-201000029 240 P.3d 1262 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
See Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., n. 9 , , 1116 n. 9 (App.2005) (defining different types of dicta).
Qwest Corp. v. City of Chandler 217 P.3d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Qwest Corp. v. City of Chandler 217 P.3d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., ¶ 9 , (citations omitted).
Alejandro v. Harrison 219 P.3d 231 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Alejandro v. Harrison 219 P.3d 231 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Resources, , 152 n. 9, , 1116 n. 9 (App.2005).
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
2778 , 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984)); Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., -53, ¶ 25 , -17 (App.2005).
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
see also Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., , 149 n. 2, ¶ 13, , 1113 n. 2 (App.2005) (noting that usufruct is the “right to utilize and enjoy the profits and advantages of something belonging to another so long as the property is not damaged or altered” (quotation omitted)).
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 177 P.3d 1224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 177 P.3d 1224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., , 152 n. 9, ¶ 22, , 1116 n. 9 (App.2005) (explaining that a comment made in a judicial opinion that is unnecessary to the decision is obiter dictum and therefore not precedential).
State of Arizona v. Patrick James Soriano 176 P.3d 44 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State of Arizona v. Patrick James Soriano 176 P.3d 44 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
See Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., n.7, n.7 (App. 2005) (appellate court “‘will not render advisory opinions anticipative of troubles which do not exist; may never exist; and the precise form of which, should they ever arise, we cannot predict’”), -11, -45 (1967).
State v. Thomas 175 P.3d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. Thomas 175 P.3d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., ¶ 9
Bentley v. Building Our Future 172 P.3d 860 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Bentley v. Building Our Future 172 P.3d 860 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Resources, ¶ 9
City of Chandler v. Arizona Department of Transportation 167 P.3d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
City of Chandler v. Arizona Department of Transportation 167 P.3d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Dep’t of Water Resources, ¶ 9