Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Wolf Corporation v. Louis, 464 P.2d 672.
- Emeofa v. Emeofa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
-
Emeofa v. Emeofa
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
(“[O]ne who has stipulated to certain facts is foreclosed from repudiating them on appeal.”).
- Digital Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Moreno 394 P.3d 1109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Digital Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Moreno 394 P.3d 1109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Abel Cuellar v. Megan G. Vettorel 332 P.3d 625 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
-
Abel Cuellar v. Megan G. Vettorel
332 P.3d 625
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
¶13 Additionally, “‘[t]he word ‘judgment’ is commonly understood to mean the act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.’” Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C.
- Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc. 279 P.3d 1188 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
-
Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc.
279 P.3d 1188
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
udgment immediately following trial, not a judgment eventually obtained following an appeal.”2 “Judgment” “‘is commonly understood to mean the act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.’” Berry v. 352 E. Va., L.L.C.
- Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C. 261 P.3d 784 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
-
Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C.
261 P.3d 784
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
¶ 28 Moreover, “[t]he word ‘judgment’ is commonly understood to mean the act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.”
- Palmer v. Palmer 170 P.3d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
-
Palmer v. Palmer
170 P.3d 676
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
at ¶ 10, 972 P.2d at 233 ( , ).
- Stonecreek Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Shure 162 P.3d 675 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
-
Followed
Stonecreek Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Shure
162 P.3d 675
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
as authority we are bound by the stipulation as to the issue on appeal.
- Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp 163 P.3d 1024 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
-
Marriage of Breitbart-Napp v. Napp
163 P.3d 1024
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
The decree of dissolution in a dissolution of marriage proceeding is a final judgment, In *81 re Marriage of Zale, ¶ 10 , ( , ), regardless of whether it was entered pursuant to a settlement agreement.
- State v. Gastelum 130 P.3d 547 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
-
State v. Gastelum
130 P.3d 547
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
(“A stipulation is a judicial admission constituting an abandonment of any contention to the contrary____”).
- Ziemak v. Schnakenberg 111 P.3d 1042 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
-
Ziemak v. Schnakenberg
111 P.3d 1042
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
(“The word ‘judgment’ is commonly understood to mean the act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.”); see also Peterson Const., 179 Ariz. at 486 , 880 P.2d at 706 (modifying a judgment so
- STATE EX REL. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY v. Hayden 91 P.3d 1007 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
-
STATE EX REL. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY v. Hayden
91 P.3d 1007
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
¶ 12 There is a legal distinction between the terms “judgment” and “debt.” “A judgment is ____ an ‘act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the *167 respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.’ ” ¶ 10 , ( , ).
- In Re the Marriage of Zale 972 P.2d 230 Ariz. 1999
-
In Re the Marriage of Zale
972 P.2d 230
Ariz. 1999
Rather, it is an “act of a court which fixes clearly the rights and liabilities of the respective parties to litigation and determines the controversy at hand.”
- Juvenile in Mohave County Juvenile Court v. Superior Court 943 P.2d 875 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
- State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989
- State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989