Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Engle Bros. v. SUPERIOR CT., IN & FOR CTY. OF PIMA, 533 P.2d 714.

39 citing documents.

Ianni v. St. Just Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ianni v. St. Just Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Pima Cty., (citations omitted); (stating that A.R.S.
Gallardo v. West Sand Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Gallardo v. West Sand Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Pima Cty., (“[W]hen the face of the complaint reflect[s] that the claim [is] barred by the statute of limitations, the burden of proving the statute was tolled devolve[s] upon the respondent real parties in interest.”).
Phillips v. Garcia 351 P.3d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Phillips v. Garcia 351 P.3d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Davis v. Davis 284 P.3d 23 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Davis v. Davis 284 P.3d 23 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
(citing Engle Bros., , ).
Levinson v. Jarrett 88 P.3d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Levinson v. Jarrett 88 P.3d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
See Montaño v. Browning, -46, ¶ 2 , -96 (App.2002); Engle Bros., , (special action relief appropriate when trial court erroneously denied motion to dismiss based on statute of limitations).
Montano v. Browning 48 P.3d 494 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Montano v. Browning 48 P.3d 494 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
(denial of motion for summary disposition not an appealable order); Engle Bros., , (special action relief appropriate when trial court erroneously denied motion to dismiss based on statute of limitations).
REPUBLIC NAT. BANK OF NY v. Pima County 25 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
REPUBLIC NAT. BANK OF NY v. Pima County 25 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
(motion to dismiss on statute of limitations ground granted only if complaint conclusively establishes action is time barred); Engle Bros., , (same).
Estate of Page v. Litzenburg 865 P.2d 128 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Estate of Page v. Litzenburg 865 P.2d 128 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
O’Dea’s reliance on Engle Brothers, , on this point betrays a fundamental confusion between “commencement” and “tolling” of a statutory limitations period.
Troutman v. Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona 826 P.2d 810 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Troutman v. Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona 826 P.2d 810 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Henke v. Superior Court 775 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Followed Henke v. Superior Court 775 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
C. Smith, Civil Trial Practice § 321, at 284 (1986).
Cooney v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 770 P.2d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Cooney v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 770 P.2d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Goodwin v. Hewlett 710 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Goodwin v. Hewlett 710 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Selby v. Karman, supra; Engle Bros., Inc. v. Superior Court, In and For County of Pima
Bailey v. Superior Court 694 P.2d 324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Bailey v. Superior Court 694 P.2d 324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State Ex Rel. Corbin v. Pickrell 667 P.2d 1304 Ariz. 1983
State Ex Rel. Corbin v. Pickrell 667 P.2d 1304 Ariz. 1983
Since there is no adequate remedy by appeal and the issues raised in this special action are of important public interest, Engle Brothers, , we accepted jurisdiction pursuant to Ariz. Const. art. 6, § 5(4).
DeBoer v. Brown 673 P.2d 922 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
DeBoer v. Brown 673 P.2d 922 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Lane v. Elco Industries, Inc. 656 P.2d 650 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Lane v. Elco Industries, Inc. 656 P.2d 650 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
In response, Elco first argues that it was the Lanes’ burden to prove to the trial court that the statute of limitations was tolled
Dicenso v. BRYANT AIR CONDITIONING CO., ETC. 643 P.2d 701 Ariz. 1982
Dicenso v. BRYANT AIR CONDITIONING CO., ETC. 643 P.2d 701 Ariz. 1982
Northern Propane Gas Co. v. Kipps 622 P.2d 469 Ariz. 1980
Northern Propane Gas Co. v. Kipps 622 P.2d 469 Ariz. 1980
Northern Propane Gas Co. v. Kipps 622 P.2d 485 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
Northern Propane Gas Co. v. Kipps 622 P.2d 485 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
Crook v. Anderson 565 P.2d 908 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977