Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Cheney v. ARIZ. SUPER. COURT FOR MARICOPA CTY., 698 P.2d 691.

34 citing documents.

Salinas v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Salinas v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Ibrahim v. Eckel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ibrahim v. Eckel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Calderon v. Mennenga Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Calderon v. Mennenga Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
and Goodman, Mennenga argues “there ‘must be’ a hearing” before the superior court could resolve Calderon’s motion to dismiss.
Penny Osuna v. Walmart Stores, Inc. Sam's Club Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Penny Osuna v. Walmart Stores, Inc. Sam's Club Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
(“The right to dismiss after an answer has been filed .
Brunet v. Murphy 135 P.3d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Brunet v. Murphy 135 P.3d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
at 132, 717 P.2d at 436 ( , ).
Larsen v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A. 978 P.2d 119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Larsen v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A. 978 P.2d 119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
See Dietz, 169 Ariz. at 508 , 821 P.2d at 169 (“The 1984 enactment of UCATA left in place the common law doctrine that a defendant whose wrong had contributed to the damage to any degree could be liable for all of the damage.”); , (under 1984 version of UCATA, “plaintiffs damages [were] reduced in proportion to the relative degree of plaintiffs fault which [was] the proximate cause of the injury or death”).
Turf Paradise, Inc. v. Maricopa County 878 P.2d 1375 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Turf Paradise, Inc. v. Maricopa County 878 P.2d 1375 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
both involve plaintiffs' requests for dismissal without prejudice to refile and take advantage of the new Uniform Contribution Among Tortfea-sors Act ("UCATA”).
Lewis v. N.J. Riebe Enterprises, Inc. 825 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1992
Lewis v. N.J. Riebe Enterprises, Inc. 825 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1992
a case in which this court held that it was not an abuse of discretion for a trial court to refuse to dismiss a case so that it could be refiled under the comparative negligence statute.
Bauer v. Crotty 805 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Bauer v. Crotty 805 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
See Hall, 149 Ariz. at 136 , 717 P.2d at 440 ; 3
Dykeman v. Engelbrecht 803 P.2d 119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Dykeman v. Engelbrecht 803 P.2d 119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Freight System, Inc., 149 Ariz 130
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Superior Court 793 P.2d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
St. Joseph's Hospital & Medical Center v. Superior Court 793 P.2d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
(“The Legislature must expressly declare an intent in the statute that it applies retroactively.”) (emphasis added).
Ayala v. Olaiz 776 P.2d 807 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Ayala v. Olaiz 776 P.2d 807 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Daggett v. County of Maricopa 770 P.2d 384 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Daggett v. County of Maricopa 770 P.2d 384 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Law v. Superior Court of State of Ariz. 755 P.2d 1135 Ariz. 1988
Law v. Superior Court of State of Ariz. 755 P.2d 1135 Ariz. 1988
Quadrone v. Pasco Petroleum Co., Inc. 752 P.2d 504 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Quadrone v. Pasco Petroleum Co., Inc. 752 P.2d 504 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Shea v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 723 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1986
Shea v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 723 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1986
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
we held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss his pre-Act complaint without prejudice after an answer had been filed, in order to re-file the complaint after the Act became effective.