Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite City of Phoenix v. Superior Court of Maricopa County, 175 P.2d 811.

29 citing documents.

Turken v. Gordon 224 P.3d 158 Ariz. 2010
Turken v. Gordon 224 P.3d 158 Ariz. 2010
(citing Humphrey in upholding a program to build temporary housing for military veterans).
Turken v. Gordon 207 P.3d 709 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Turken v. Gordon 207 P.3d 709 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
enue bonds sold to fund pollution control facilities were for the public purpose of protecting the health of citizens by preventing or limiting air, water, and other forms of pollution); Walled Lake Door Co., 107 Ariz. at 550 , 490 P.2d at 556 (holding that supplying water for fire suppression preserved and protected lives and property and was a public purpose); , (holding that the erection of temporary housing for war veterans and their families through expenditure of municipal funds was spent
Kromko v. Arizona Board of Regents 146 P.3d 1016 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Kromko v. Arizona Board of Regents 146 P.3d 1016 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Courts, as our supreme court noted, “have no power to enjoin legislative functions.”
Winkle v. City of Tucson 949 P.2d 502 Ariz. 1997
Winkle v. City of Tucson 949 P.2d 502 Ariz. 1997
Pioneer Trust Co. v. Pima County 811 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
Pioneer Trust Co. v. Pima County 811 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
Queen Creek, 108 Ariz. at 451-52 , 501 P.2d at 393-94 .
Citizens for Orderly Development & Environment v. City of Phoenix 540 P.2d 1239 Ariz. 1975
Citizens for Orderly Development & Environment v. City of Phoenix 540 P.2d 1239 Ariz. 1975
A court of equity, being vested with judicial, not legislative, powers, cannot properly interpose any obstacle to the exercise of the legislative discretion vested in such municipal bod[ies].’” -45
Heiner v. City of Mesa 515 P.2d 355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Heiner v. City of Mesa 515 P.2d 355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
89 P. 521 (1906); , the Hartman case, supra
Queen Creek Land & Cattle Corp. v. Yavapai County Board of Supervisors 501 P.2d 391 Ariz. 1972
Queen Creek Land & Cattle Corp. v. Yavapai County Board of Supervisors 501 P.2d 391 Ariz. 1972
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Superior Court 418 P.2d 594 Ariz. 1966
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Superior Court 418 P.2d 594 Ariz. 1966
ropriate “to prevent an inferior court from acting without or in excess of jurisdiction, where wrong, damage and injustice are likely to follow and there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy available.” , , 73 A.L.R.2d 1 ; , ; , .
City of Phoenix v. Phoenix Civic Auditorium & Convention Center Ass'n 408 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1965
City of Phoenix v. Phoenix Civic Auditorium & Convention Center Ass'n 408 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1965
we upheld as a public purpose the expenditure of money by Phoenix to construct housing for veterans and their families, and pointed out that the Phoenix City Charter authorized condemnation of property for public purposes.
City of Phoenix v. Popkin 378 P.2d 242 Ariz. 1963
City of Phoenix v. Popkin 378 P.2d 242 Ariz. 1963
We hold that the court below had no jurisdiction to prohibit the publication of the ordinance, , , but the impoi-tance of the constitutional question involved and the time and expense to which the parties would be put in bringing an action after publication of the ordinance have led us to decide the case on the merits.
City of Phoenix v. Linsenmeyer 346 P.2d 140 Ariz. 1959
City of Phoenix v. Linsenmeyer 346 P.2d 140 Ariz. 1959
The validity of this transaction was immediately challenged, , , and found to be a nullity.
Valley Drive-In Theatre Corp. v. Superior Court 291 P.2d 213 Ariz. 1955
Valley Drive-In Theatre Corp. v. Superior Court 291 P.2d 213 Ariz. 1955
City of Tucson v. Garrett 267 P.2d 717 Ariz. 1954
Adams v. Bolin 247 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1952
Adams v. Bolin 247 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1952
This court has spoken: “Courts have no power to enjoin legislative functions.” , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by