Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Bennett Blum, M.D., Inc. v. Cowan Law Office of Rand Haddock, 330 P.3d 961.

54 citing documents.

CHOPKO v. FIDELITY NATIONAL Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
CHOPKO v. FIDELITY NATIONAL Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 13 (App. 2014).
Michael K. Reilly and Sierra Pipeline, LLC v. Philip L. Canale and Terra Canale 565 P.3d 1066 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Michael K. Reilly and Sierra Pipeline, LLC v. Philip L. Canale and Terra Canale 565 P.3d 1066 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Cf. Bennett Blum, M.D., (noting that garnishment proceedings are statutory in nature and treated as independent from original lawsuit).
Hj Ventures v. candelario/carmax Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Hj Ventures v. candelario/carmax Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
see also Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 13 (App. 2014) (“Garnishment proceedings are .
Schooley v. pena/farmers 510 P.3d 522 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Schooley v. pena/farmers 510 P.3d 522 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Bennett Blum, M.D., –08, ¶ 13 (App. 2014) (noting that § 12-341.01 does not apply to purely statutory causes of action) (quotation and citation omitted).
Stratton v. Burton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Stratton v. Burton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“However, we review questions of law, including the superior court’s authority to award attorney’s fees and contract interpretation, de novo.” Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Jacob Benson v. Casa De Capri Ent Ariz. 2022
Jacob Benson v. Casa De Capri Ent Ariz. 2022
[and] courts may not allow garnishment proceedings to follow any course other than that charted by the legislature.” Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (quoting Patrick v. Associated Drygoods Corp. (Goldwater’s Div.), ) (holding that because garnishment is a statutory cause of action, “a trial court must follow the manner in which the legislature has chosen for making [a] determination”); see also Carey v. Soucy, 245 Ari
Heritage v. Weinberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Heritage v. Weinberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Cortez Investment v. Yousif Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Cortez Investment v. Yousif Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 13 (App. 2014).
Ray and Lindsay v. Gilbert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Ray and Lindsay v. Gilbert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Sanders v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sanders v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Inc., v. Cowan, ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Laveen Meadows v. Mejia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Laveen Meadows v. Mejia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 8 (App. 2014).
Woensdregt v. Handyman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Woensdregt v. Handyman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 8 (App. 2014).
Kellin v. Hon. lynch/americanwest 449 P.3d 719 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Kellin v. Hon. lynch/americanwest 449 P.3d 719 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
courts may not allow garnishment proceedings to follow any course other than that charted by the legislature.” Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 16 (App. 2014) (quoting Patrick v. Associated Drygoods Corp. (Goldwater’s Division), ).
Baseline Tree v. Sun Valley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Baseline Tree v. Sun Valley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 13 (App. 2014).
Ironwood Commons Cmty. Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Randall 439 P.3d 1193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ironwood Commons Cmty. Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Randall 439 P.3d 1193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Bennett Blum, M.D., Inc. v. Cowan , , 205, ¶ 5, , 962 (App. 2014).
Grady's v. Alliance Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Grady's v. Alliance Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 12-341.01, we do not reach the issues related to sections 8 and 26, but focus merely on the application of § 12-341.01.6 See Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014) (attorney’s fees award will be affirmed “if it was appropriate under any of the authorities relied upon by the proponent”); see also Skydive Ariz., ¶ 50 (App. 2015) (appellate court upholds the superior court’s ruling “if it has ‘any reasonable basis’”).
Black Creek v. Alanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Black Creek v. Alanco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Hta-Scw v. Roskamp Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Hta-Scw v. Roskamp Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 8 (App. 2014); see also A.R.S.
Matthews v. Robles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Matthews v. Robles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sys., ¶ 6 (App. 2003); Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
Rotalo v. Sahd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rotalo v. Sahd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
No. 3496, (decision to award or deny sanctions); ¶ 2 (App. 2005) (denial of a Rule 59 motion to alter or amend verdict); Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014) (award of attorney fees).
Maxted v. Tws Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Maxted v. Tws Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
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
London v. Karatz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
London v. Karatz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Copper State v. Espiritu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Copper State v. Espiritu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(citing Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2015)).
Shoemake v. Estancia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Shoemake v. Estancia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Bennett Blum, M.D., ¶ 5 (App. 2014).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by