Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Joon Nae Kim v. Mansoori, 153 P.3d 1086.

30 citing documents.

Esparza v. Warner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Esparza v. Warner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
¶¶ 10, 13 (App. 2007) (holding that Rule 54(b) does not authorize “a judgment on an attorney fee claim preceding a decision on the merits”).
Moldovan v. Long Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Moldovan v. Long Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
See Madrid v. Avalon Care Ctr.-Chandler, L.L.C., ¶ 3 (App. 2014); ¶ 6 (App. 2007).
Flynn v. Olsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Flynn v. Olsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Rozenman v. Blanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Rozenman v. Blanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
§ 12- 2101(A)(1); ¶ 6 (App. 2007).
Myers, Jr. v. Freescale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Myers, Jr. v. Freescale Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 12- 2101(A)(1); ¶ 6 (App. 2007).
Heritage v. Weinberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Heritage v. Weinberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
3 HERITAGE v. WEINBERG Decision of the Court 2101(A)(1); ¶ 6 (App. 2007).
Klien v. York Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Klien v. York Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 6 (App. 2012) ( ¶ 5 (App. 2007)).
Madrid v. Avalon Care Center-Chandler, L.L.C. 338 P.3d 328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Madrid v. Avalon Care Center-Chandler, L.L.C. 338 P.3d 328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Angel B. v. Vanessa J. 316 P.3d 1257 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Angel B. v. Vanessa J. 316 P.3d 1257 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-25 (1948); ¶ 5 , (noting this court “has the duty to review its jurisdiction and, if jurisdiction is lacking, to dismiss the appeal”).
Flores v. Martinez 289 P.3d 946 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Flores v. Martinez 289 P.3d 946 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
3 assertion,3 “[t]his court has the duty to review its jurisdiction and, if jurisdiction is lacking, to dismiss the appeal.” (appellate court may examine its jurisdiction sua sponte).
Fields v. Oates 286 P.3d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Fields v. Oates 286 P.3d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
P. 54(b), 58(g); ¶ 9 , Nat’l. Broker Assocs., Inc. v. Marlyn Nutraceuticals, Inc., -18, ¶¶ 31-38 , -85 (App.2005).
Southwest Gas Corporation Taylor v. Grubb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Southwest Gas Corporation Taylor v. Grubb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
v. Superior Court, -92, - 77 (1981); 5 “whether „the judgment in fact is‟” final is another question of law that we review de novo, Mansoori, 153 P.3d at 1088, (App. 1
In Re Guardianship of Pacheco 199 P.3d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
In Re Guardianship of Pacheco 199 P.3d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
As support for its argument
Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
decides and disposes of the cause on its merits, leaving no question open for judicial determination.’” Id., (final judgment disposes of at least one claim in a multiclaim action); (final judgment is “‘an ultimate disposition of an individual claim’”), quoting Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Mackey, 351 U.S.