Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Brannigan v. Raybuck, 667 P.2d 213.

94 citing documents.

Alaface v. National Investment Co. 892 P.2d 1375 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
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
both of which pre-dated enactment of A.R.S.
Petolicchio v. Santa Cruz County Fair & Rodeo Ass'n 866 P.2d 1342 Ariz. 1994
Estate of Hernandez v. Bd. of Regents 866 P.2d 1330 Ariz. 1994
Estate of Hernandez v. Bd. of Regents 866 P.2d 1330 Ariz. 1994
Petolicchio v. Santa Cruz County Fair & Rodeo Ass'n 866 P.2d 1342 Ariz. 1994
On appeal, Defendants noted that Arizona first recognized a cause of action against a seller of alcohol in this court’s 1983 , , , .
Callender v. Transpacific Hotel Corp. 880 P.2d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
Callender v. Transpacific Hotel Corp. 880 P.2d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
The court extended the duty to require liquor suppliers to exercise reasonable care “in furnishing liquor to those who, by reason of immaturity or previous over-indulgence, may lack full capacity of self-control and may therefore injure themselves, as well as others.”
Wiley v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 847 P.2d 595 Ariz. 1993
Wiley v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 847 P.2d 595 Ariz. 1993
11 B. The Retroactivity of This Decision “In civil actions, Arizona law has always been ‘that unless otherwise stated, a court opinion operates retroactively as well as prospectively.’ ” , (quoting Chevron Chem.
Estate of Hernandez v. Arizona Board of Regents 838 P.2d 1283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Estate of Hernandez v. Arizona Board of Regents 838 P.2d 1283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Schwab v. Matley 793 P.2d 1088 Ariz. 1990
Schwab v. Matley 793 P.2d 1088 Ariz. 1990
In 1983, we disapproved of Collier and Pratt , holding that the “common law doctrine of tavern owner non-liability is abolished in Arizona.” 521 , 221 (1983)
Fain Land & Cattle Co. v. Hassell 790 P.2d 242 Ariz. 1990
Fain Land & Cattle Co. v. Hassell 790 P.2d 242 Ariz. 1990
Supply Co., , Hawkins, 152 Ariz. at 504 , 733 P.2d at 1087 ; , Chevron Chem.
Carrillo v. El Mirage Roadhouse, Inc. 793 P.2d 121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Carrillo v. El Mirage Roadhouse, Inc. 793 P.2d 121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Elgin v. Great-West Life Assurance Co. 786 P.2d 1027 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Elgin v. Great-West Life Assurance Co. 786 P.2d 1027 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Professional Sports, Inc. v. Gillette Security, Inc. 766 P.2d 91 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Professional Sports, Inc. v. Gillette Security, Inc. 766 P.2d 91 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
In Arizona, a supplier of liquor has a common law duty to use reasonable care in supplying liquor to underage individuals who, “by reason of immaturity or previous over-indulgence, may lack full capacity of self-control and may therefore injure themselves, as well as others.”
Crown v. Raymond 764 P.2d 1146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Crown v. Raymond 764 P.2d 1146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
“It is the prevailing rule, recognized in Arizona, that a breach of a statute intended as a safety regulation is not merely evidence of negligence but is negligence per se.”
Law v. Superior Court of State of Ariz. 755 P.2d 1135 Ariz. 1988
Gosewisch v. American Honda Motor Co. 737 P.2d 376 Ariz. 1987
Gosewisch v. American Honda Motor Co. 737 P.2d 376 Ariz. 1987
-71 , -45 (1962) (instruction that jury “must” find for defendant if it finds that the facts establish contributory negligence would be unconstitutional); , (jury should be instructed on law of contributory negligence but cannot be peremptorily required to follow the instruction); , (court cannot find contributory negligence or assumption of the risk as a matter of law).
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Monares v. Wilcoxson 736 P.2d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Monares v. Wilcoxson 736 P.2d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
the court adopted § 288A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (1965).
Del E. Webb v. Superior Court of Arizona 726 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1986
Del E. Webb v. Superior Court of Arizona 726 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1986
While plaintiff’s appeal was pending, , , both of which had retroactive application.
Calvert v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 697 P.2d 684 Ariz. 1985
Calvert v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 697 P.2d 684 Ariz. 1985
§ 4-244 and of new and stringent laws pertaining to the punishment of drunk drivers shows legislature’s concern for damage done by drunk drivers); , (accord).
Hebert v. Club 37 Bar 701 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Hebert v. Club 37 Bar 701 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
have changed the law so as to make the tavern keeper liable for this homicide.
Perez v. Industrial Commission 685 P.2d 154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Perez v. Industrial Commission 685 P.2d 154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
accord Annot., 10 A.L.R.3d 1371 (1966).
University of Arizona Health Sciences Center v. Superior Court 667 P.2d 1294 Ariz. 1983
University of Arizona Health Sciences Center v. Superior Court 667 P.2d 1294 Ariz. 1983
Ontiveros v. Borak 667 P.2d 200 Ariz. 1983
Ontiveros v. Borak 667 P.2d 200 Ariz. 1983