Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., 639 P.2d 330.

103 citing documents.

State v. Castleberry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
260 Ariz. at 483, ¶ 33 (citing Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., ).
McCarthy v. Kummerle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
McCarthy v. Kummerle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
State of Arizona v. John Logan Brown Ariz. 2025
State of Arizona v. John Logan Brown Ariz. 2025
Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Pusd 210 v. Hon. sinclair/lucero Ariz. 2025
Pusd 210 v. Hon. sinclair/lucero Ariz. 2025
¶ 2 (2018) (“[F]oreseeability is not a factor in determining duty.”); cf. Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., (rejecting argument by shopping center employee, injured after attempting a shortcut exit through decorative foliage, that the owner owed her a duty because it “knew or should have known” that employees were crossing the planter; this knowledge did not bring the planter within the area of the business’s in
Perez v. Circle K Ariz. 2025
Perez v. Circle K Ariz. 2025
See Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Rachelle Renee Westerman, Paul Bryan Westerman v. Timothy E. Ernst 563 P.3d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Rachelle Renee Westerman, Paul Bryan Westerman v. Timothy E. Ernst 563 P.3d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
The court determined Rachelle had exceeded her invitation’s scope by entering the landscaping and, as a result, Ernst and Schneider “no longer owed her the same duty that is owed to invitees.” Relying on our supreme court’s decision in Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., the court reasoned that Rachelle had attempted a shortcut through the “clearly landscaped” gravel area, which no reasonable person could have regarded as a designated walkway.
Rosales v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Rosales v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., -43 (1982).
McCaw v. Az. Snowbowl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
McCaw v. Az. Snowbowl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“A business visitor is a person who is invited to enter or remain on land for a purpose directly or indirectly connected with business dealings with the possessor of the land.” Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., (internal quotations and citations omitted).
Ephraim Dabush v. Seacret Direct LLC 478 P.3d 695 Ariz. 2021
Ephraim Dabush v. Seacret Direct LLC 478 P.3d 695 Ariz. 2021
at 567 ¶ 23 (stating that a duty exists based on a landowner-invitee and landowner-licensee special relationship); Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., (stating that a possessor of land owes a duty of care to entrants on their property); Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 314A, 341–343A (Am.
Lane v. Gavilan Peak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lane v. Gavilan Peak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
a person “invited to enter or remain on land for a purpose directly or indirectly connected with business dealings” of the landowner; a trespasser is someone who enters or remains on another’s 10 LANE v. GAVILAN PEAK Decision of the Court land “without a privilege to do so.” Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., –43 (1982) (quoting Restatement §§ 329, 332).
Arpaio v. Hines Gs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Arpaio v. Hines Gs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 10 (App. 2015) (citing Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., ).
Ritchie v. Costello 356 P.3d 337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Ritchie v. Costello 356 P.3d 337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., -43, -33 (1982).
Smith v. Almida Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Smith v. Almida Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., -43, -33 (1982); Hicks v. Superstition Mountain Post No. 9399, (Arizona courts generally follow Restatement unless rules, statutes, or caselaw have adopted contrary positions).
Lim v. Gillies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Lim v. Gillies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
§ 33-1551; Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., - 43, -33 (1982); Shannon v. Butler Homes, Inc., -17, -95 (1967).3 A possessor of land is: (a) a person who is in occupation of the land with intent to control it or (b) a person who has been in occupation of land with intent
Emerman v. Az Holding Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Emerman v. Az Holding Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
McMurtry v. Weatherford Hotel, Inc. 293 P.3d 520 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
McMurtry v. Weatherford Hotel, Inc. 293 P.3d 520 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
See Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Rudinsky v. Harris 290 P.3d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Rudinsky v. Harris 290 P.3d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
P. 56(c); Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Oliver v. Henry 260 P.3d 314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Oliver v. Henry 260 P.3d 314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
P. 56(c)(1); accord Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Wickham v. Hopkins 250 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Wickham v. Hopkins 250 P.3d 245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
See generally Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., -43 , -33 (1982); Shannon v. Butler Homes, Inc., -17 , -95 (1967).
State Compensation Fund v. Yellow Cab Co. 3 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State Compensation Fund v. Yellow Cab Co. 3 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Knauss v. DND Neffson Co. 963 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Knauss v. DND Neffson Co. 963 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Stephens v. Bashas' Inc. 924 P.2d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Stephens v. Bashas' Inc. 924 P.2d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
A business visitor or invitee is “a person who is invited to enter or remain on land for a purpose directly or indirectly connected with business dealings with the possessor of the land.” Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., , quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 332 (1965)
Maurer v. Cerkvenik-Anderson Travel, Inc. 890 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Maurer v. Cerkvenik-Anderson Travel, Inc. 890 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
FACTS Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., , the facts are as follows.
Callender v. MCO PROPERTIES 885 P.2d 123 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Callender v. MCO PROPERTIES 885 P.2d 123 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
A public invitee is defined as “a person who is invited to enter or remain on land as a member of the public for a purpose for which the land is held open to the public.” Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., , citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 332(2) (1965).
Ocotillo West Joint Venture v. Superior Court 844 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Ocotillo West Joint Venture v. Superior Court 844 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Cf. Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.
Woodty v. Weston's Lamplighter Motels 830 P.2d 477 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992