Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Democratic Party of Pima County v. Beth Ford Pima County Board of Supervisors, 269 P.3d 721.

60 citing documents.

Jones v. Tempe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Jones v. Tempe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
v. Ford, –48, ¶¶ 8–9 (App. 2012).
Sierra Club v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Sierra Club v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Andrich v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Andrich v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Vaughn-Leavitt v. U.S. Bank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Vaughn-Leavitt v. U.S. Bank Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
v. Ford, ¶ 10 (App. 2012) (once party seeking sanctions makes showing required by § 12-349, “the award of attorney fees becomes mandatory”).
Bosch v. Bosch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Bosch v. Bosch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Huey v. Huey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Huey v. Huey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Nayeri v. Mohave County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Nayeri v. Mohave County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
American Civil Liberties Union of Az v. Dcs Ariz. 2021
American Civil Liberties Union of Az v. Dcs Ariz. 2021
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Anthony Garcia v. Hon. butler/state 487 P.3d 256 Ariz. 2021
Anthony Garcia v. Hon. butler/state 487 P.3d 256 Ariz. 2021
v. Ford, ¶ 9 (App. 2012); ¶ 17 (App. 2010) (“A general principle of statutory construction is that the use of the word ‘may’ generally indicates a permissive provision .
Ward v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Ward v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Rector v. Stevenson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Rector v. Stevenson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Lavicka v. Lavicka Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Lavicka v. Lavicka Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Garlan v. Garlan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Garlan v. Garlan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Wells Fargo v. Terrenate Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Wells Fargo v. Terrenate Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Klein v. Loyden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Klein v. Loyden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
v. Ford, –49, ¶ 12 (App. 2012).
Paradigm DKD Grp., LLC v. Pima Cnty. Assessor 439 P.3d 1210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
Paradigm DKD Grp., LLC v. Pima Cnty. Assessor 439 P.3d 1210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
Jacobs v. Mihcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jacobs v. Mihcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 12-341 mandates a trial court award costs to the “successful party” in a civil action, the trial court has great discretion in determining the “successful party.” Democratic Party of Pima Cty., v. Ford, ¶ 15 (App. 2012).
Riverbend v. Edwards Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Riverbend v. Edwards Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
v. Ford, ¶ 6, but review questions of law, including the court’s authority to award fees and issues of contract interpretation, de novo, Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5
Bentley v. Bentley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Bentley v. Bentley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
v. Ford, ¶ 9, (providing that “may” indicates permissive intent while “shall” denotes a mandatory provision).
Sirrah Enterprises, LLC v. Wunderlich 377 P.3d 360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sirrah Enterprises, LLC v. Wunderlich 377 P.3d 360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
v. Ford, ¶ 9, (providing that the use of “shall” indicates a mandatory provision).
Tucson Estates Property Owners Association, Inc. v. McGovern, Sines 366 P.3d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Tucson Estates Property Owners Association, Inc. v. McGovern, Sines 366 P.3d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
v. Ford, ¶¶ 8-10, -24 (App. 2012).
Eick v. Delta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Eick v. Delta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
v. Ford, ¶ 15 (App. 2012).
Flynn v. Rodrick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Flynn v. Rodrick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012).
Tessler v. Progressive Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Tessler v. Progressive Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
v. Ford, ¶ 6 (App. 2012) ( ¶ 5 (App. 2009)).