Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Richey v. Western Pacific Development Corp., 684 P.2d 169.

36 citing documents.

Babicky v. Copper State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Babicky v. Copper State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Dominguez v. Dominguez 547 P.3d 1079 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Dominguez v. Dominguez 547 P.3d 1079 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Corp., (holding that the operative time of the statute is when the document was filed in the county recorder’s office); see also Sitton v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l. Tr.
Karl v. US Bank National Ass'n 308 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Karl v. US Bank National Ass'n 308 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
¶ 23 Appellees argue that we should apply Hatch Cos. Contracting, , , for the proposition that trustors who have not paid off their loan obligations are neither owners nor beneficial title holders under A.R.S.
SWC Baseline & Crismon Investors, L.L.C. v. Augusta Ranch Ltd. Partnership 265 P.3d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
SWC Baseline & Crismon Investors, L.L.C. v. Augusta Ranch Ltd. Partnership 265 P.3d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Lebaron Properties, LLC v. Jeffrey S. Kaufman, Ltd. 221 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Lebaron Properties, LLC v. Jeffrey S. Kaufman, Ltd. 221 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Santa Fe Ridge Homeowners' Ass'n v. Bartschi 199 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Santa Fe Ridge Homeowners' Ass'n v. Bartschi 199 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Corp., , (concluding § 33-420 applies to groundless recording of lis pendens).
Fillmore v. MARICOPA WATER PROCESSING 120 P.3d 697 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Fillmore v. MARICOPA WATER PROCESSING 120 P.3d 697 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Kinetico asserts that, in actions for slander of title, the only person with standing is the owner of the property.
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Hohn 832 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1992
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Hohn 832 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1992
Hatch Companies Contracting, Inc. v. Arizona Bank 826 P.2d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Hatch Companies Contracting, Inc. v. Arizona Bank 826 P.2d 1179 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Hatch maintains that the beneficial title holder is the one whom documents of record show to be the beneficial owner of the property.
Evergreen West, Inc. v. Boyd 810 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Evergreen West, Inc. v. Boyd 810 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Patterson v. Bianco 805 P.2d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Patterson v. Bianco 805 P.2d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Patterson’s argument that ADM should have pierced the notice of lis pen-dens and determined precisely to what extent Patterson’s
Wyatt v. Wehmueller 785 P.2d 581 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Wyatt v. Wehmueller 785 P.2d 581 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
West Pinal Family Health Center, Inc. v. McBryde 785 P.2d 66 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
West Pinal Family Health Center, Inc. v. McBryde 785 P.2d 66 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Matter of Bowen 774 P.2d 1348 Ariz. 1989
Matter of Bowen 774 P.2d 1348 Ariz. 1989
Bianco v. Patterson 768 P.2d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Bianco v. Patterson 768 P.2d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Coventry Homes, Inc. v. Scottscom Partnership 745 P.2d 962 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Coventry Homes, Inc. v. Scottscom Partnership 745 P.2d 962 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Tucson Estates, Inc. v. Superior Court 729 P.2d 954 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Tucson Estates, Inc. v. Superior Court 729 P.2d 954 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
rty, , it has been held to be improperly filed in an action on a note, Mammoth Cave Production Credit Ass’n v. Gross, , or to impose a constructive trust on shares of stock, , 147 P. 722 (1915), or to recover a real estate commission
Morris v. Achen Const. Co., Inc. 747 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Morris v. Achen Const. Co., Inc. 747 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by