Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Sligh v. Watson, 214 P.2d 123.

32 citing documents.

Edward Greenband Enterprises of Arizona v. Pepper 538 P.2d 389 Ariz. 1975
Edward Greenband Enterprises of Arizona v. Pepper 538 P.2d 389 Ariz. 1975
we discussed the policy behind the rule, saying it was: “ * * * to allow the pleading party to take advantage of any possible development in the evidence which would show him to be entitled to recovery and thus p
Management Clearing, Inc. v. Vance 471 P.2d 707 Ariz. 1970
Management Clearing, Inc. v. Vance 471 P.2d 707 Ariz. 1970
ate, and they have agreed fully on the terms and entered into a binding contract for such sale or exchange, his duties are at an end and his commission is fully earned, and it is immaterial that the parties to the contract rescind mutually or that one or the other thereof defaults and the sale or exchange is not fully effected.’ , ; , .
New Pueblo Const., Inc. v. LAKE PATAGONIA REC. ASSOCIATION, INC. 467 P.2d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
New Pueblo Const., Inc. v. LAKE PATAGONIA REC. ASSOCIATION, INC. 467 P.2d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Puente v. Lee 447 P.2d 51 Ariz. 1968
Puente v. Lee 447 P.2d 51 Ariz. 1968
ate, and they have agreed fully on the terms and entered into a binding contract for such sale or exchange, his duties are at an end and his commission is fully-earned, and it is immaterial that the parties to the contract rescind mutually or that one or the other thereof defaults and the sale or exchange is not fully effected.’ , ; , .” In the instant case, plaintiff did not procure the buyer, and does not claim to have done so.
Bradley v. Westerfield 402 P.2d 577 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Bradley v. Westerfield 402 P.2d 577 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Coulter v. Stewart 379 P.2d 910 Ariz. 1963
Coulter v. Stewart 379 P.2d 910 Ariz. 1963
Whitfield Transportation v. Tucson Warehouse & Transfer Co.
Peterson v. Valley National Bank of Phoenix 368 P.2d 317 Ariz. 1962
Peterson v. Valley National Bank of Phoenix 368 P.2d 317 Ariz. 1962
Richards Development Company v. Sligh 358 P.2d 329 Ariz. 1961
Richards Development Company v. Sligh 358 P.2d 329 Ariz. 1961
Diamond v. Haydis 356 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1960
Diamond v. Haydis 356 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1960
and they have agreed fully *333 on the terms and entered into a binding contract for such sale or exchange, his duties are at an end and his commission is fully earned, and it is immaterial that the parties to the contract rescind mutually or that one or the other thereof defaults and the sale or exchange is not fully effected.” , ; , .
Diamond v. Chiate 300 P.2d 583 Ariz. 1956
Diamond v. Chiate 300 P.2d 583 Ariz. 1956
A reading of the transcript *90 makes it crystal clear that the trial court, in admitting such testimony, was relying, as it had a right to do, upon the majority decision of this court rendered in Sligh v. Watson, 1950, , , wherein the admission of similar testimony was upheld in a completely analogous situation.
Blaine v. Stinger 290 P.2d 732 Ariz. 1955
Blaine v. Stinger 290 P.2d 732 Ariz. 1955
is the plaintiff’s contention in the first assignment of error that his obligation under the contract of sale was fully met when Haydis signed the contract to purchase the liquor license regardless of whether the sale was completed'on not, , ; , , at page 1375, , .
PHOENIX FEED AND SEED CO. v. Adams 279 P.2d 447 Ariz. 1955
PHOENIX FEED AND SEED CO. v. Adams 279 P.2d 447 Ariz. 1955
Garza v. Fernandez 248 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1952
Garza v. Fernandez 248 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1952
reads in part: “This being a case where a summary judgment was granted to defendants, our first inquiry should be directed to the basic essential for the granting of a summary judgment.
Smith v. Phlegar 236 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1951
Smith v. Phlegar 236 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1951
It is not enough to say that it is necessary to make the contract fair, that it ought to have contained a stipulation which is not found in it, or that without such covenant it would be improvident, unwise, or operate unjustly.” Cf., , , , .
Geyler v. Dailey 217 P.2d 583 Ariz. 1950
Geyler v. Dailey 217 P.2d 583 Ariz. 1950
Ingalls v. Neidlinger 216 P.2d 387 Ariz. 1950
Ingalls v. Neidlinger 216 P.2d 387 Ariz. 1950
The basic essentials for the granting of a , .