Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Schroeder v. Hudgins, 690 P.2d 114.

46 citing documents.

Mirchandani v. Bmo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Mirchandani v. Bmo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
n because he personally guaranteed the loans and because Quality was a “closely held LLC.” However, although a guarantor who has paid upon his principal’s debt has an immediate right of action against the principal, affirmative recovery by the guarantor against a third party would exceed the scope of the surety relationship and “usurp claims belonging only to the principal.” (citations and quotations omitted) ( n.1 (App. 1988)).
Webb v. Gittlen 174 P.3d 275 Ariz. 2008
Webb v. Gittlen 174 P.3d 275 Ariz. 2008
¶ 11, (citing Schroeder v. Hudgins, 142 Ariz. 395, 399, abrogation on other 7 n.1, n.1 (App. 1988)).
Premium Cigars Intern. v. Farmer-Butler-Leavitt Ins. 96 P.3d 555 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Premium Cigars Intern. v. Farmer-Butler-Leavitt Ins. 96 P.3d 555 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
399-400 n. 1, -54 (App.1988).
Botma v. Huser 39 P.3d 538 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Botma v. Huser 39 P.3d 538 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
399-400 n. 1, , 1353-54 n. 1 (App.1988).
Albers v. Edelson Technology Partners L.P. 31 P.3d 821 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Albers v. Edelson Technology Partners L.P. 31 P.3d 821 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
(holding that one who has relations with the corporation “independent of those which the shareholder derives through his interest in the corporate assets and business” has a personal right of action).
Monthofer Investment Ltd. Partnership v. Allen 943 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Monthofer Investment Ltd. Partnership v. Allen 943 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse 945 P.2d 317 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse 945 P.2d 317 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Kiley v. Jennings, Strouss & Salmon 927 P.2d 796 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Kiley v. Jennings, Strouss & Salmon 927 P.2d 796 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
this court held: In Arizona, actions for legal malpractice are tort claims subject to the two year statute of limitations for personal injuries, , and actions for personal injuries are not assignable.
Princess Plaza Partners v. State 928 P.2d 638 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Princess Plaza Partners v. State 928 P.2d 638 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Chavez v. Copper State Rubber of Arizona, Inc. 897 P.2d 725 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & Young 901 P.2d 1178 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & Young 901 P.2d 1178 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
530 (1928); , (“[glenerally, a stockholder may not bring an action in his own right, for such an action would authorize multitudinous litigation and ignore the corporate entity”); , (“even where all the stock in a corporation is owned by a sole shareholder, he may not maintain an action individually for wrongs against the corporation”).
Chavez v. Copper State Rubber of Arizona, Inc. 897 P.2d 725 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Schroeder v. *427 Hudgins
Hill v. Chubb Life American Insurance 870 P.2d 1133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Hill v. Chubb Life American Insurance 870 P.2d 1133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Lo Piano v. Hunter 840 P.2d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Lo Piano v. Hunter 840 P.2d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
the rule was applied to prohibit assignment of a legal malpractice claim to a trustee in bankruptcy.
Blum v. STATE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS 829 P.2d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Blum v. STATE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS 829 P.2d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Angus Medical Co. v. Digital Equipment Corp. 840 P.2d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Angus Medical Co. v. Digital Equipment Corp. 840 P.2d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Miller v. Westcor Ltd. Partnership 831 P.2d 386 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Miller v. Westcor Ltd. Partnership 831 P.2d 386 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Neville v. Vingelli 826 P.2d 1196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Neville v. Vingelli 826 P.2d 1196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
GM Development Corp. v. Community American Mortgage Corp. 795 P.2d 827 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
GM Development Corp. v. Community American Mortgage Corp. 795 P.2d 827 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Elliott v. Videan 791 P.2d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Elliott v. Videan 791 P.2d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Clearwater v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 780 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Clearwater v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 780 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Franko v. Mitchell 762 P.2d 1345 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Franko v. Mitchell 762 P.2d 1345 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
decided six months after Donnelly, we noted that under Chalpin a claim for attorney malpractice cannot be sustained when the claimant is neither a client nor in privity with the attorney.
Ward v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies 731 P.2d 106 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Ward v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies 731 P.2d 106 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
FACTS Viewing the evidence and all inferences reasonably drawn therefrom most favorably to appellants, , the facts essential to resolution of the appeal are as follows.
Molever v. Roush 732 P.2d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Molever v. Roush 732 P.2d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
(actions for legal malpractice are tort claims).