Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Yamamoto v. SANTA CRUZ CTY. BD. OF SUP'RS, 606 P.2d 28.

28 citing documents.

Sanchez v. Maricopa County Ariz. 2025
of Supervisors, Hetzel v. County of Pinal, No. CV-23-00218-PHX-ROS, 2025 WL 711953, at *4 (D. Ariz. Mar.
Gabriel Garibay v. Hon. johnson/fox 565 P.3d 236 Ariz. 2025
of Supervisors, (extending absolute immunity to a court clerk following a court’s order).
Gabriel Garibay v. Hon. Kellie Johnson William Fox, Az Constable Ethics Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
For example, we determined judicial immunity protected a court clerk engaged in an “essentially ministerial” act following a judge’s order.
Trotter v. Maricopa County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
of Supervisors, (affirming entry of summary judgment in favor of superior court because court not sui juris and not proper defendant).
Simon v. MARICOPA MEDICAL CENTER 234 P.3d 623 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Simon v. MARICOPA MEDICAL CENTER 234 P.3d 623 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Adams v. State 916 P.2d 1156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Adams v. State 916 P.2d 1156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
of Supervisors, , (court clerk’s return of cash appeal bond to the wrong party pursuant to court order was protected by judicial immunity).
Collins v. Corbin 771 P.2d 1380 Ariz. 1989
Collins v. Corbin 771 P.2d 1380 Ariz. 1989
Physical Therapy Associates, Inc. v. Pinal County 743 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Physical Therapy Associates, Inc. v. Pinal County 743 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Patton v. County of Mohave 741 P.2d 301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Patton v. County of Mohave 741 P.2d 301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Norcor of America v. Southern Arizona International Livestock As *171 sociation
State v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 708 P.2d 1337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 708 P.2d 1337 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Similarly, , the court held that because the county board of supervisors had no right to control the activities of the justice of the peace, the clerk of the justice of the peace, the superior court or the clerk of the superior court, the county could not be held liable on the theory of respondeat superio
Acevedo v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 690 P.2d 38 Ariz. 1984
Acevedo v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 690 P.2d 38 Ariz. 1984
Courts have extended judicial immunity to a court clerk, , court-appointed psychiatrists, Seibel v. Kemble, supra, and partition commissioners, Ashbrook v. Hoffman, supra.
Fleming v. Pima County 685 P.2d 1319 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Fleming v. Pima County 685 P.2d 1319 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
of Supervisors, , we held that a claim for mandamus was within the claim statute.
Hernandez v. Maricopa County 673 P.2d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Hernandez v. Maricopa County 673 P.2d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Division Two of this court ruled that the Board of Supervisors of Santa Cruz County had no right to control the activities of the justice of the peace, the clerk of the justice of the peace, the Santa Cruz County Superior Court or the clerk of that superior court.
Acevedo v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 690 P.2d 79 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Distinguished Acevedo v. Pima County Adult Probation Department 690 P.2d 79 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Landry v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR CTY. OF PIMA 609 P.2d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
Landry v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR CTY. OF PIMA 609 P.2d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
Whether or not the Department of Public Safety is an entity subject to suit, , it is not a public officer.