Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Kromko v. City of Tucson, 47 P.3d 1137.

28 citing documents.

Brown v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Brown v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
This court reviews an injunction for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 4 (App. 2002), recognizing an overbroad 3 The superior court correctly noted that Martin v. City of Boise, 920 F.3d 584 (9th Cir. 2019) and Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, 72 F.4th 868 (9th Cir. 2023), reversed, City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, No. 23-175, 603 U.S. __ (slip op.
US Bank v. Kurtz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
US Bank v. Kurtz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 11 (App. 2011) ( ¶ 4 (App. 2002)).
Whitestone v. Jade Palace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Whitestone v. Jade Palace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶20 “We review a trial court’s order granting or denying an injunction for a clear abuse of discretion.” ¶ 4 (App. 2002).
cheatham/huey v. Plea Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Cheatham v. Diciccio 356 P.3d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Cheatham v. Diciccio 356 P.3d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
cheatham/huey v. Plea Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
COMMITTEE FOR JUSTICE & FAIRNESS v. Arizona Secretary of State's Office 332 P.3d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
COMMITTEE FOR JUSTICE & FAIRNESS v. Arizona Secretary of State's Office 332 P.3d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission v. Brain 311 P.3d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission v. Brain 311 P.3d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
TP Racing, L.L.L.P. v. Simms 307 P.3d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
TP Racing, L.L.L.P. v. Simms 307 P.3d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
IB Property Holdings, LLC v. Rancho Del Mar Apartments Ltd. Partnership 263 P.3d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
IB Property Holdings, LLC v. Rancho Del Mar Apartments Ltd. Partnership 263 P.3d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
-91 (2006), as have we, , and we are bound to follow decisions of our supreme court, Green v. Lisa Frank, Inc.
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. De Meo 254 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. De Meo 254 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Dowling v. Stapley 179 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Dowling v. Stapley 179 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
McCloud v. State of Arizona Dept. of Public Safety And Kimbro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
McCloud v. State of Arizona Dept. of Public Safety And Kimbro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
See Flying Diamond Airpark, (“We review a trial court’s decision not to apply [equitable] estoppel for an abuse of discretion.”); ¶¶ 4, 5, (trial court’s determination of injunctive relief and application of laches reviewed for abuse of discretion); (ruling on relief for excusable neglect under Rule 60(c), Ariz. R. Civ.
Arizona State Democratic Party v. State 98 P.3d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Arizona State Democratic Party v. State 98 P.3d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
¶ 10 , we were required to consider the statutory phrase “influencing the outcomes of elections.” The phrase is contained within A.R.S.