Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Blake v. Schwartz, 42 P.3d 6.

44 citing documents.

Patricia Adams v. Hon. Brenden Griffin City Prosecutor's Office 540 P.3d 1221 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
Patricia Adams v. Hon. Brenden Griffin City Prosecutor's Office 540 P.3d 1221 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
Dow v. Az Nsac Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Dow v. Az Nsac Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 10 (App. 2002) () (“If possible, this court has a duty to construe a statute so that it will be constitutional.”).
Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Resort Cmtys., LLC, ¶ 9 (App. 2013) ( ¶ 29 (App. 2002)).
Adrian E. v. Department of Child Safety 369 P.3d 264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Adrian E. v. Department of Child Safety 369 P.3d 264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
RSP Architects, Ltd. v. Five Star Development Resort Communities, LLC 306 P.3d 93 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
RSP Architects, Ltd. v. Five Star Development Resort Communities, LLC 306 P.3d 93 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
¶ 29 , (quotation omitted).
Merrill v. Merrill 284 P.3d 880 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Merrill v. Merrill 284 P.3d 880 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
¶ 28 , ("We also construe statutes, when possible, to avoid constitutional difficulties."); ¶ 27 , (court has "duty to construe a statute so as to render it constitutional if reasonably possible”).
In Re the Commitment of Wilfredo Jaramillo 278 P.3d 1284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
In Re the Commitment of Wilfredo Jaramillo 278 P.3d 1284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Actions 3(a), (c); n.6, n.6 (App. 2002) (mandamus action used to compel public official to perform duty; mandamus now “replaced with special actions”).
State of Arizona v. James Charles Ray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. James Charles Ray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Anderson v. Arizona Game & Fish Department 243 P.3d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Anderson v. Arizona Game & Fish Department 243 P.3d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
(“[U]ncertainty about the meaning or interpretation of [a] statute’s terms requires the appellate court to apply methods of statutory interpretation that go beyond the statute’s literal language, [including consideration of] the statute’s ...
Perry v. Honorable Emmet Ronan 234 P.3d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Perry v. Honorable Emmet Ronan 234 P.3d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
“Special action jurisdiction is highly discretionary,” ¶ 7 , and is appropriate when “there is no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal.” Ariz. R.P.
Hernandez v. Lynch 167 P.3d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Hernandez v. Lynch 167 P.3d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Bayless Markets, Inc., , ); ¶ 10 , (“If possible, this court has a duty to construe a statute so that it will be constitutional”) ( ¶ 11 , ).
State of Arizona v. Alvaro Felix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
State of Arizona v. Alvaro Felix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
See Jackson v. Schneider, 5 (“This Court retains the broad discretion to decline jurisdiction.”); (acceptance of special action jurisdiction is “highly discretionary”).
Slade v. Schneider 129 P.3d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Slade v. Schneider 129 P.3d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 118 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Department of Water Resources 118 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
¶ 26 , (when the Legislature retains statutory language that has been interpreted by the courts, it is presumed to have approved those interpretations).
State Ex Rel. Smith v. Conn 98 P.3d 881 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State Ex Rel. Smith v. Conn 98 P.3d 881 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
¶ 10 , (citations omitted).
O'CONNOR v. Hyatt 87 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
O'CONNOR v. Hyatt 87 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Jackson v. Schneider 86 P.3d 381 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Jackson v. Schneider 86 P.3d 381 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
¶ 7 , , 8 *327 (App.2002) (explaining that “[s]pecial action jurisdiction is highly discretionary.”).
TANQUE VERDE UNIFIED SCHOOL v. Bernini 76 P.3d 874 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
TANQUE VERDE UNIFIED SCHOOL v. Bernini 76 P.3d 874 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Rayes 75 P.3d 148 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Rayes 75 P.3d 148 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Bergeron Ex Rel. Perez v. O'NEIL 74 P.3d 952 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Bergeron Ex Rel. Perez v. O'NEIL 74 P.3d 952 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Boynton v. Anderson 66 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Boynton v. Anderson 66 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
McLoughlin Catalina v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
McLoughlin Catalina v. Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002