Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Berry v. Superior Court, 788 P.2d 1258.

36 citing documents.

Holloway v. Goodard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Holloway v. Goodard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
See Berry v. Superior Court (Martone)
Hott v. Sommers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Hott v. Sommers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
of Maricopa, (explaining civil contempt adjudications are not appealable and appellate review is “only possible by special action”).
Prince v. Prince Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Prince v. Prince Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
See Berry v. Supreme Court (Martone)
Garlan v. Garlan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Garlan v. Garlan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
See Berry v. Superior Court (Martone)
Boyilla v. Boyilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Boyilla v. Boyilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
See Berry v. Superior Court (Desert Holding & Inv.), (finding this court has no subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from a civil contempt order).
Marriage of Henderson v. Henderson 390 P.3d 1226 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Marriage of Henderson v. Henderson 390 P.3d 1226 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
1(a); , , (contempt finding only reviewable by special action).
Chambers v. Fox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Chambers v. Fox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Berry v. Superior Court (Martone), ¶ 30 (App. 1998).
Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Petrocelli v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Jones v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Jones v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See Berry v. Superior Court In & For County of Maricopa, 2 Wife moved to stay the order, and upon the filing of adequate security, the court approved Wife remaining in the home pending the resolution of this appeal.
Hatfield v. hatfield/state Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Hatfield v. hatfield/state Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Caskey v. Battani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Caskey v. Battani Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Peace v. Peace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Peace v. Peace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See, (“The rule is well established that civil contempt adjudications are not appealable.”).
Lund v. Donahoe 261 P.3d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Lund v. Donahoe 261 P.3d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State of Arizona v. Hesam Mohajerin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Hesam Mohajerin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
Trombi v. Donahoe 222 P.3d 284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Trombi v. Donahoe 222 P.3d 284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Berry v. Superior Court (Desert Holding & Inv.)
Danielson v. Evans 36 P.3d 749 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
Danielson v. Evans 36 P.3d 749 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
State Ex Rel. Hance v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles 875 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State Ex Rel. Hance v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles 875 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
at 245-46 , 463 P.2d at 551-52
State Ex Rel. Neely v. Rodriguez 796 P.2d 876 Ariz. 1990
State Ex Rel. Neely v. Rodriguez 796 P.2d 876 Ariz. 1990
Goodrich v. Industrial Comm’n, 11 Ariz.App.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by