Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital, 710 P.2d 1025.

385 citing documents.

Leo Eisenberg & Co., Inc. v. Payson 785 P.2d 49 Ariz. 1989
Hosp., -94 , -49 (1985).
Sertich v. Moorman 783 P.2d 1199 Ariz. 1989
Sertich v. Moorman 783 P.2d 1199 Ariz. 1989
Bartning v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 783 P.2d 790 Ariz. 1989
Bartning v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 783 P.2d 790 Ariz. 1989
Hosp., -94 , -49 (1985).
Udy v. Calvary Corp. 780 P.2d 1055 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Udy v. Calvary Corp. 780 P.2d 1055 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Dodge v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md. 778 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1989
Dodge v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md. 778 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1989
-94 , -49 (1985) (“successful party” on appeal includes party who achieves reversal of an unfavorable interim order when order is central to the case and issue of law decided on appeal is “sufficiently significant that the appeal may be considered as a separate unit”).
Douglas v. Wilson 774 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Douglas v. Wilson 774 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
made it clear that a claim for breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing will not lie if it involves only a claim for prospective employment.
Western Sun Contractors Co. v. Superior Court 766 P.2d 96 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Western Sun Contractors Co. v. Superior Court 766 P.2d 96 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Bar J Bar Cattle Co., Inc. v. Pace 763 P.2d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Bar J Bar Cattle Co., Inc. v. Pace 763 P.2d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Hosp., -88 , -43 (1985).
Broomfield v. Lundell 767 P.2d 697 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Broomfield v. Lundell 767 P.2d 697 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
the supreme court discussed at some length the implied-in-law covenant of good faith and fair dealing and the circumstances under which its breach may result in liability for tort or contract damages.
Pioneer Annuity Life Insurance v. National Equity Life Insurance 765 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Pioneer Annuity Life Insurance v. National Equity Life Insurance 765 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Oldenburger v. Del E. Webb Development Co. 765 P.2d 531 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Oldenburger v. Del E. Webb Development Co. 765 P.2d 531 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Barrow v. Arizona Board of Regents 761 P.2d 145 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Barrow v. Arizona Board of Regents 761 P.2d 145 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Norman v. Recreation Centers of Sun City, Inc. 752 P.2d 514 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Norman v. Recreation Centers of Sun City, Inc. 752 P.2d 514 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Hosp., , : The trend has been to modify the at-will rule by creating exceptions to its operation.
Lindsey v. University of Arizona 754 P.2d 1152 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Lindsey v. University of Arizona 754 P.2d 1152 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
A. Corbin, Corbin on Contracts, § 585 at 481-87 (1960).
Barmat v. John and Jane Doe Partners AD 747 P.2d 1218 Ariz. 1987
Barmat v. John and Jane Doe Partners AD 747 P.2d 1218 Ariz. 1987
Gatecliff v. Great Republic Life Insurance 744 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Gatecliff v. Great Republic Life Insurance 744 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
They argue that they have qualified as the prevailing parties by achieving reversal of a ruling central to the case and are entitled to an award of attorney’s , (supplemental opinion).
Valles v. Arizona Board of Regents 743 P.2d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Valles v. Arizona Board of Regents 743 P.2d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
He was therefore an “at will” employee, “one hired without specific contractual term.”
Gilbert v. Board of Medical Examiners 745 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Gilbert v. Board of Medical Examiners 745 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
-88 , -43 (1985) , [quoting Calbom v. Knudtzon, 65 Wash.2d 157, 162-63 , -54 (1964)]; Ulan v. Vend-A-Coin, Inc., 27 Ariz.App.
Coventry Homes, Inc. v. Scottscom Partnership 745 P.2d 962 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Coventry Homes, Inc. v. Scottscom Partnership 745 P.2d 962 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Phipps v. Clark Oil & Refining Corp. 408 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 1987
State v. Arizona Pension Planning 739 P.2d 1373 Ariz. 1987
State v. Arizona Pension Planning 739 P.2d 1373 Ariz. 1987
Holt v. Utica Mutual Insurance 759 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Holt v. Utica Mutual Insurance 759 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
See Wagenseller v. Scottsdale *476 Memorial Hosp.
Loffa v. Intel Corp. 738 P.2d 1146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Loffa v. Intel Corp. 738 P.2d 1146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
the Arizona Supreme Court considered the circumstances when employer disciplinary procedures reflected in personnel manuals, employer statements, and other employer practices modify what otherwise would be an em
G.M. Ambulance & Medical Supply Co. v. Canyon State Ambulance, Inc. 739 P.2d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
G.M. Ambulance & Medical Supply Co. v. Canyon State Ambulance, Inc. 739 P.2d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
the court adopted the Restatement view of the law dealing with interference with contract.
Ford v. Revlon, Inc. 734 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1987
Ford v. Revlon, Inc. 734 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1987
Snow v. Western Savings & Loan Ass'n 730 P.2d 204 Ariz. 1987
Snow v. Western Savings & Loan Ass'n 730 P.2d 204 Ariz. 1987
-88 , -43 (1985); Antwerp Diamond Exchange, 130 Ariz. at 530 , 637 P.2d at 740 .