Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Jones v. Pak-Mor Manufacturing Co., 700 P.2d 819.

36 citing documents.

In Re Term of Parental Rights as to A.Z. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to A.Z. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Amanda Campion and James Campion v. City of Tucson 536 P.3d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
Amanda Campion and James Campion v. City of Tucson 536 P.3d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
¶41 The Campions filed a they were entitled to the following jury instruction: For a defendant to claim an absence of accident history evidences a lack of an unreasonably dangerous condition, it must prove it has a system to determine if incidents are occur
Krieger v. Duick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Krieger v. Duick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co., (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control District 217 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control District 217 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Co., , quoting M. Udall & J. Livermore, Arizona Law of Evidence, § 13, at 20 (2nd ed.1982).
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Dairman 95 P.3d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Dairman 95 P.3d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Co., , (quoting M. Udall & J. Livermore, Arizona Law of Evidence, § 13 at 20-21 (2d ed. 1982)) ("An offer of proof is 'simply a detailed description of what the proposed evidence is.’ ...
Hernandez v. State 35 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Hernandez v. State 35 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Isbell v. State 9 P.3d 322 Ariz. 2000
Explained Isbell v. State 9 P.3d 322 Ariz. 2000
we explained that a very careful foundation must be laid before even otherwise relevant evidence of this sort could be admitted.
State v. Doody 930 P.2d 440 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
State v. Doody 930 P.2d 440 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Jimenez v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. 885 P.2d 120 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Jimenez v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. 885 P.2d 120 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
Rodriguez v. Schlittenhart 780 P.2d 442 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Rodriguez v. Schlittenhart 780 P.2d 442 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Marriage of Molloy v. Molloy 761 P.2d 138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Marriage of Molloy v. Molloy 761 P.2d 138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Co., , (question of relevancy looks at whether evidence lacks probative value and whether probativeness is outweighed by danger of prejudice), cert.
Trus Joist Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America 735 P.2d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Trus Joist Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America 735 P.2d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Co., , affirmed in part, , see also, Hohlenkamp v. Rheem Mfg.
Boy v. I.T.T. Grinnell Corp. 724 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Boy v. I.T.T. Grinnell Corp. 724 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Co., , has recently issued a definitive opinion regarding the admissibility of evidence of the safety history of a product which is dispositive of this case.
Readenour v. Marion Power Shovel 719 P.2d 1058 Ariz. 1986
Readenour v. Marion Power Shovel 719 P.2d 1058 Ariz. 1986
Schneider v. Cessna Aircraft Co. 722 P.2d 321 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Schneider v. Cessna Aircraft Co. 722 P.2d 321 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Co. , has re-examined the propriety of introducing evidence of safety history.
Chapman v. Levi-Strauss 701 P.2d 1219 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Chapman v. Levi-Strauss 701 P.2d 1219 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985