Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Hurst v. Bisbee Unified School District No. Two, 607 P.2d 391.

33 citing documents.

Derek D. Fraser v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Distinguished Derek D. Fraser v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Chavez v. Roosevelt School Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Chavez v. Roosevelt School Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
No. Two, –12 (App. 1994).
Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. v. City of Tucson 381 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc. v. City of Tucson 381 P.3d 276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Res Judicata, Collateral Estoppel ¶30 P.2d 843 (App. 1994), P.2d 391 (App. 1979), the City maintains that the procurement director’s decision should be given finality and that Falcone’s contract claim should be dismissed as an impermissible collateral attack on that decision.
Hintze v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Hintze v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Smith v. Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission 132 P.3d 1187 Ariz. 2006
Smith v. Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission 132 P.3d 1187 Ariz. 2006
No. Two, , (stating that constitutional challenges to an administrative act must be raised through appeal of the final agency decision); , (noting that “[a] party ...
Hawkins v. State, Dept. of Economic SEC. 900 P.2d 1236 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Hawkins v. State, Dept. of Economic SEC. 900 P.2d 1236 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Thielking v. Kirschner 859 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Thielking v. Kirschner 859 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Hist., , and that, when a party fails to seek timely review, the administrative decision becomes final.
State Ex Rel. Neely v. Rodriguez 796 P.2d 876 Ariz. 1990
State Ex Rel. Neely v. Rodriguez 796 P.2d 876 Ariz. 1990
Perez v. Maricopa County 760 P.2d 1089 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Perez v. Maricopa County 760 P.2d 1089 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Hurst v. Bisbee Unified School District No. 2
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
Campbell v. Superior Court, 18 Ariz.App.
State Farm Automobile Insurance v. Dressler 738 P.2d 1134 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State Farm Automobile Insurance v. Dressler 738 P.2d 1134 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Hurst v. Bisbee Unified School District No. 2
United Farm Workers v. Arizona Agricultural Employment Relations Board 716 P.2d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
United Farm Workers v. Arizona Agricultural Employment Relations Board 716 P.2d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
In Re the Appeal in Yuma County, Juvenile Action Nos. J-81-339 & J-81-340 682 P.2d 6 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
In Re the Appeal in Yuma County, Juvenile Action Nos. J-81-339 & J-81-340 682 P.2d 6 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
See In the Matter of the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile No. S-933, , Hurst v. Bisbee Unified School District No. 2
Smith v. Arizona Department of Corrections 659 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Smith v. Arizona Department of Corrections 659 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Farmers Investment Co. v. Arizona State Land Department 666 P.2d 469 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Farmers Investment Co. v. Arizona State Land Department 666 P.2d 469 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Those cases relied on by appellants, , , do not control.
In Re the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. S-933 660 P.2d 1205 Ariz. 1982
In Re the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. S-933 660 P.2d 1205 Ariz. 1982
Silver v. Rose 661 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982