Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen's Foundation, 637 P.2d 1053.

193 citing documents.

State v. Steiger 781 P.2d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Maricopa County 786 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Maricopa County 786 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Found.
For Deannexation v. City of Goodyear 773 P.2d 1026 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
For Deannexation v. City of Goodyear 773 P.2d 1026 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
See, e.g., Arizona Downs, at 558 , 637 P.2d *473 1053, at 1061 (1981) (law special if it has no broader application in the future); Barbee, , (law clearly special because no other city may come within terms); , (law authorizing Fund Manager’s contracting p
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 773 P.2d 455 Ariz. 1989
Lueck v. UNITED DAIRYMEN OF ARIZONA 782 P.2d 708 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Lueck v. UNITED DAIRYMEN OF ARIZONA 782 P.2d 708 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
*238 See Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Found., , (holding that a statute, even if it contains the word “shall,” may be interpreted to indicate desirability, preference, or permission).
Fund Manager v. Corbin 778 P.2d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Fund Manager v. Corbin 778 P.2d 1244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
‘All statutes are presumed to be constitutional and any doubts will be resolved in favor of constitutionality.’ Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Bryant v. Continental Conveyor & Equipment Co. 751 P.2d 509 Ariz. 1988
Bryant v. Continental Conveyor & Equipment Co. 751 P.2d 509 Ariz. 1988
2d 16 (1973); Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Matter of Guardianship of Cruz 741 P.2d 317 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Matter of Guardianship of Cruz 741 P.2d 317 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Found.
Smith v. City of Tucson 736 P.2d 1184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Smith v. City of Tucson 736 P.2d 1184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
le 2, § 13, the equal privileges and immunities clause; and 3) article 4, part 2, § 19(13), which prohibits local or special laws “[granting to any corporation, association, or individual, any special or exclusive privileges, immunities, or franchises.” Many of his arguments in that regard are answered by reference to the supreme court’s decision in Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Browning v. Corbett 734 P.2d 1030 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Browning v. Corbett 734 P.2d 1030 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Picture Rocks Fire District v. Pima County 733 P.2d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Picture Rocks Fire District v. Pima County 733 P.2d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Barsema v. Susong 751 P.2d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Barsema v. Susong 751 P.2d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Readenour v. Marion Power Shovel 719 P.2d 1058 Ariz. 1986
Readenour v. Marion Power Shovel 719 P.2d 1058 Ariz. 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Hall v. A.N.R. Freight System, Inc. 717 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1986
Hall v. A.N.R. Freight System, Inc. 717 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1986
“All statutes are presumed to be constitutional and any doubts will be resolved in favor of constitutionality.” Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
State v. Christi 718 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Christi 718 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
State v. Robinson 735 P.2d 798 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Robinson 735 P.2d 798 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
See Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Goodyear Farms v. City of Avondale 714 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1986
Goodyear Farms v. City of Avondale 714 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1986
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Arizona Farmworkers Union v. Agricultural Employment Relations Board 712 P.2d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Arizona Farmworkers Union v. Agricultural Employment Relations Board 712 P.2d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
and Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Tanner Companies v. Superior Court 696 P.2d 693 Ariz. 1985
Toto v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 698 P.2d 753 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Toto v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 698 P.2d 753 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
A special law applies only to certain members of a class or to an arbitrarily defined class which is not rationally related to a legitimate legislative purpose [citations omitted].” Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
State v. Loughran 693 P.2d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Loughran 693 P.2d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation, , (Arizona Downs).
Kenyon v. Hammer 688 P.2d 961 Ariz. 1984
Kenyon v. Hammer 688 P.2d 961 Ariz. 1984
1278 , 36 L.Ed.2d 16 (1973); Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation
Arizona Downs v. Turf Paradise, Inc. 682 P.2d 443 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Arizona Downs v. Turf Paradise, Inc. 682 P.2d 443 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
§ 5-110.A.” While this appeal was pending, the Arizona Supreme Court issued its opinion in Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen’s Foundation