Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Nunez v. Nunez, 545 P.2d 69.
- Torres v. Maricopa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
Torres v. Maricopa
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
See Ariz. Rev. Stat. (“A.R.S.”) § 12-612; ¶ 11 (2002)
- Olivas v. Yavapai Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
Olivas v. Yavapai
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
§ 12-612(C); (stating that “there is ‘one action’ for damages occasioned by a wrongful death,” and “one plaintiff, one of the persons designated by statute”).
- Brady v. Tempe life/brady/mckee/hospice Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
-
Brady v. Tempe life/brady/mckee/hospice
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(“‘the respective interests of the persons entitled to be compensated for the loss of the decedent are different and in some circumstances, such as here, may be conflicting’ and ‘participation in the trial cannot be limited to one attorney’”) ().
- Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered 258 P.3d 172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
-
Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered
258 P.3d 172
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
424, 429 , (“[P]laintiff has the burden of proof in establishing damages ____”); ¶ 22 , (“The judge should instruct the jury to ‘find the amount of damages sustained by each beneficiary.’ ” ( , )).
- White v. Greater Arizona Bicycling Association 163 P.3d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
- Burkhamer v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
-
Burkhamer v. State of Arizona
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Our courts have consistently construed this to mean that there is “one action for damages with one plaintiff and one judgment.” ¶ 11, (same); (stating “there is ‘one action’ for damages occasioned by a wrongful death,” and there is “but one plaintiff, one of the persons designated by statute”).
- Valder Law Offices v. Keenan Law Firm 129 P.3d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
-
Valder Law Offices v. Keenan Law Firm
129 P.3d 966
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
505, 508, ¶ 11 , (same); , (stating “there is ‘one action’ for damages occasioned by a wrongful death,” and there is “but one plaintiff, one of the persons designated by statute”).
- Wilmot v. Wilmot 58 P.3d 507 Ariz. 2002
-
Wilmot v. Wilmot
58 P.3d 507
Ariz. 2002
is one action for damages with one plaintiff and one judgment.” (“there is 'one action' for damages occasioned by a wrongful death.
- Greenwald v. Ford Motor Co. 993 P.2d 1087 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
-
Greenwald v. Ford Motor Co.
993 P.2d 1087
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
§§ 12-612,12-613; , Begay, 148 Ariz. at 508 , 715 P.2d at 761 .
- Williams v. Superior Court 820 P.2d 332 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
-
Williams v. Superior Court
820 P.2d 332
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
(“participation in the trial of [a] wrongful death action by separate counsel for beneficiaries whose interests conflict, must be allowed”).
- Katz v. Filandro 739 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
- Katz v. Filandro 739 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
- Sedillo v. City of Flagstaff 737 P.2d 1377 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
- Sedillo v. City of Flagstaff 737 P.2d 1377 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
- Begay v. City of Tucson 715 P.2d 758 Ariz. 1986
- Begay v. City of Tucson 715 P.2d 758 Ariz. 1986
- Quinonez on Behalf of Quinonez v. Andersen 696 P.2d 1342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
- Quinonez on Behalf of Quinonez v. Andersen 696 P.2d 1342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
- Hurt v. SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF ARIZ. 601 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1979
- Hurt v. SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF ARIZ. 601 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1979