Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Campbell v. Arnold, 590 P.2d 909.

38 citing documents.

Wright v. Mailatyar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Wright v. Mailatyar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State of Arizona v. Andres Sanchez 537 P.3d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
State of Arizona v. Andres Sanchez 537 P.3d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
Because we are “a court of limited jurisdiction,” we have “only [the] jurisdiction specifically given to [us] by statute.” see also A.R.S.
Takieh v. Banner Health Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Takieh v. Banner Health Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
We are “a court of limited jurisdiction and ha[ve] only jurisdiction specifically given to [us] by statute.”
Jessicah C. v. Dcs, J.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Jessicah C. v. Dcs, J.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
See, Brionna J. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7 (App. 2019).
Ingersoll v. Abec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ingersoll v. Abec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Brionna J. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Brionna J. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶7 “The Court of Appeals is a court of limited jurisdiction and has only jurisdiction specifically given to it by statute.” ¶ 6 (App. 2011) ().
Klien v. York Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Followed Klien v. York Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
In Re the Guardianship and Conservatorship Of: Robert Sommer 386 P.3d 1281 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
In Re the Guardianship and Conservatorship Of: Robert Sommer 386 P.3d 1281 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
¶6 This court “is a court of limited jurisdiction and has only jurisdiction specifically given to it by statute.”
State v. Martinson 384 P.3d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Martinson 384 P.3d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
§ 13-4033(A); (court of appeals’ jurisdiction is dictated by statute).
Camasura v. Camasura 358 P.3d 600 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Camasura v. Camasura 358 P.3d 600 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Ghadimi v. Soraya 285 P.3d 969 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Ghadimi v. Soraya 285 P.3d 969 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
§§ 12-2101 (Supp.2011), 12-120.21 (2003)
Santee v. Mesa Airlines, Inc. America West Airlines, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Santee v. Mesa Airlines, Inc. America West Airlines, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
¶2 Our jurisdiction is provided and limited by statute
Francisco F. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 266 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Francisco F. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 266 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
¶6 “The Court of Appeals is a court of limited jurisdiction and has only jurisdiction specifically given to it by statute.”
State v. Regenold 249 P.3d 337 Ariz. 2011
State of Arizona v. John Richard Eby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State of Arizona v. John Richard Eby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
¶3 “The Court of Appeals is a court of limited jurisdiction and has only jurisdiction specifically given to it by statute.”
State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Superior Court 826 P.2d 337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Superior Court 826 P.2d 337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Baca, 130 Ariz. at 222 , 635 P.2d at 510 (
State v. Poli 776 P.2d 1077 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
State v. Poli 776 P.2d 1077 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
§ 12-2101(B) , (Struckmeyer, J., dissenting).
Silver v. Rose 661 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Baca v. Don 635 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Baca v. Don 635 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Barnet v. Superior Court 605 P.2d 445 Ariz. 1979
Barnet v. Superior Court 605 P.2d 445 Ariz. 1979
vacated , the Court of Appeals in considering the issue now before this court stated: “Real parties in interest equate the words ‘each claim’ as used in the above statute *468 with ‘cause of action’ and contend that since there is only one cause of action, to-wit negligence, the decision of the review pan