Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Bliss v. Treece, 658 P.2d 169.

66 citing documents.

State v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
(assuming evidence not included in the record supported the court’s findings when the record was incomplete).
R & a Smart v. Frank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
R & a Smart v. Frank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Even if Frank claims further evidence would bolster his case, this court “must assume any evidence not available on appeal supported the trial court’s action”
State v. Kelly 545 P.3d 478 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Kelly 545 P.3d 478 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Shane D., Kassandra D. v. Dcs, T.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Shane D., Kassandra D. v. Dcs, T.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Anderson v. Union Pacific Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Anderson v. Union Pacific Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Levesque Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Levesque Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
at 146, ¶ 10; (interpreting prior version of A.R.S.
Wing v. U-Haul Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Wing v. U-Haul Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
By comparison, the defendant was unable to prevent his vehicle’s collision with the plaintiff’s car, notwithstanding his application of his vehicle’s brakes.
State v. Carson 391 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Vasquez-Araiza v. Gurrola Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Vasquez-Araiza v. Gurrola Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(“Where the record is incomplete, a reviewing court must assume any evidence not available on appeal supported the trial court’s action.”).
Chereka v. Gadissa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Chereka v. Gadissa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Creasey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Creasey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-19, -72 (1983); see also Ariz. R. Evid.
State v. Geeslin 212 P.3d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
State v. Geeslin 212 P.3d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Messina v. MIDWAY CHEVROLET CO. 209 P.3d 147 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Messina v. MIDWAY CHEVROLET CO. 209 P.3d 147 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
-19 , -72 (1983) (person with specialized knowledge may testify as an expert if his testimony will assist the trier of fact); , (expert testimony is inappropriate if the trier of fact is qualified without such evidence to intelligen
Webb v. Omni Block, Inc. 166 P.3d 140 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Webb v. Omni Block, Inc. 166 P.3d 140 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Lohmeier v. Hammer 148 P.3d 101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Lohmeier v. Hammer 148 P.3d 101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Livingston 75 P.3d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State v. Livingston 75 P.3d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
(interpreting prior version of § 28-729(1) “to exclude from its reach those movements which are beyond the driver’s control”).
State v. Sierra-Cervantes 37 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Sierra-Cervantes 37 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
(“failure to give a certain instruction is not reversible error unless it is prejudicial to the rights of a defendant, and such prejudice "will not be presumed but must appear from the record.”); , (holding that only prejudicial errors in instructions warrant reversal).
In Re Estate of Shumway 3 P.3d 977 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In Re Estate of Shumway 3 P.3d 977 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Rodriguez v. Gavette 3 P.3d 977 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Rodriguez v. Gavette 3 P.3d 977 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State v. Harrison 985 P.2d 486 Ariz. 1999
State v. Valenzuela 984 P.2d 12 Ariz. 1999
State v. Valenzuela 984 P.2d 12 Ariz. 1999
(errors involving improper instructions are harmless unless prejudice resulted).
Souza v. Fred Carries Contracts, Inc. 955 P.2d 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Souza v. Fred Carries Contracts, Inc. 955 P.2d 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
It is well settled that “[ejxpert opinion will not be rejected merely because it touches an ultimate issue or possibly invades the ‘province of the jury.’ ” , Ariz.R.Evid.
Amerco v. Shoen 907 P.2d 536 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Amerco v. Shoen 907 P.2d 536 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Burris v. City of Phoenix 875 P.2d 1340 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Burris v. City of Phoenix 875 P.2d 1340 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Clearwater v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 780 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Clearwater v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 780 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989