Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Ray v. Tucson Medical Center, 230 P.2d 220.

43 citing documents.

Jane Doe I; Jane Doe II; And John Doe v. Lenzner Medical Services Llc... ... Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Jane Doe I; Jane Doe II; And John Doe v. Lenzner Medical Services Llc... ... Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Torres v. Jai Dining Services Ariz. 2023
Torres v. Jai Dining Services Ariz. 2023
Tina Zambrano v. M & Rc II LLC Ariz. 2022
Tina Zambrano v. M & Rc II LLC Ariz. 2022
Ernest Quiroz Et Ux v. Alcoa Inc 416 P.3d 824 Ariz. 2018
Ernest Quiroz Et Ux v. Alcoa Inc 416 P.3d 824 Ariz. 2018
–36 (1951): The declaration of “public policy” is primarily a legislative function.
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Lofts at Fillmore Condominium Ass'n v. Reliance Commercial Construction, Inc. 189 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Volunteer Center of So. Az. v. Staples, Ford, Pima Co. 147 P.3d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Volunteer Center of So. Az. v. Staples, Ford, Pima Co. 147 P.3d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Ctr., P.2d 220 (1951); accord Restatement (Third) of Trusts § 28 cmt.
Marriage of Cook v. Cook 104 P.3d 857 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Marriage of Cook v. Cook 104 P.3d 857 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Ctr., , (“The declaration of ‘public policy' is primarily a legislative function.”)); , (“[T]he matter of determining what is ‘good public policy’ is for the executive and legislative departments and ...
City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. 78 P.3d 1056 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. 78 P.3d 1056 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Ctr., , (declaration of public policy is primarily legislative function).
Taylor v. Graham County Chamber of Commerce 33 P.3d 518 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
Taylor v. Graham County Chamber of Commerce 33 P.3d 518 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
(“The declaration of ‘public policy’ is primarily a legislative function.”); , (“[T]he matter of determining what is ‘good public policy’ is for the executive and legislative departments and ...
McDaniel v. Troy Design Services Co. 925 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
McDaniel v. Troy Design Services Co. 925 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
B. Vicarious Liability for the Acts of Lent Employees Vicarious liability “rests upon the employment of the servant by the master and the master’s right to exercise direction and control over his work in the conduct of his business.”
Driscoll v. Harmon 601 P.2d 1051 Ariz. 1979
Driscoll v. Harmon 601 P.2d 1051 Ariz. 1979
Ray *17 v. Tucson Medical Center
Burns v. Burns 519 P.2d 190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
Burns v. Burns 519 P.2d 190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
the doctrine of charitable immunity was abrogated.
Scottsdale Jaycees v. SUPERIOR CT. OF MARICOPA CO. 499 P.2d 185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Scottsdale Jaycees v. SUPERIOR CT. OF MARICOPA CO. 499 P.2d 185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Windauer v. O'CONNOR 477 P.2d 561 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Windauer v. O'CONNOR 477 P.2d 561 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Necessary entrenchments upon this doctrine, to which the common law gave birth, lie appropriately within the domain of appellate courts
SPUR FEEDING COMPANY v. Fernandez 463 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
SPUR FEEDING COMPANY v. Fernandez 463 P.2d 847 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Stone v. Arizona Highway Commission 381 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1963
Stone v. Arizona Highway Commission 381 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1963
* * * It is equally true that when the reason for the existence of a declared public policy no longer obtains that the courts should without hesitation declare that such public policy no longer exists.” -36
Hernandez v. County of Yuma 369 P.2d 271 Ariz. 1962
Hernandez v. County of Yuma 369 P.2d 271 Ariz. 1962
Casey v. Beaudry Motor Company 315 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1957
Casey v. Beaudry Motor Company 315 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1957
or stated another way: “Negligence only becomes a question of law for the court’s determination when rational minds may not draw different conclusions from the undisputed evidence.” , ; and for the latest expression thereon see, Matsumato v. Arizona Sand & Rock Co., , .
Harlan v. City of Tucson 309 P.2d 244 Ariz. 1957
Harlan v. City of Tucson 309 P.2d 244 Ariz. 1957
A , , as follows: “The declaration of ‘public policy’ is primarily a legislative function.
Local 266, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District 275 P.2d 393 Ariz. 1954
Local 266, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District 275 P.2d 393 Ariz. 1954
v. Tucson Medical Center, 1951, , .
Gustafson v. Rajkovich 263 P.2d 540 Ariz. 1953
Bristor v. Cheatham 240 P.2d 185 Ariz. 1952
Bristor v. Cheatham 240 P.2d 185 Ariz. 1952
4 A.L.R.2d 735 ; , ; Calhoun Gold Min.