Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Higgins v. Guerin, 245 P.2d 956.

36 citing documents.

Nickerson v. Nickerson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Nickerson v. Nickerson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
he parties] stipulated to the following: “The repairs and improvements shall be valued based on the value added to the sale price of the home, and not the actual price of repairs and improvements.” ¶15 Trial stipulations are binding on the parties unless the parties show good cause and “are relieved by the court of its binding effect.”
State v. Campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
urt has discretion to relieve a party from a stipulation “entered into through inadvertence, excusable neglect, fraud, mistake of fact or law, where the facts stipulated have changed or there has been a change in the underlying conditions that could not have been anticipated, or where special circumstances exist rendering it unjust to enforce[.]” Rutledge, 147 Ariz. at 550; (holding that the trial court may relieve a party from a stipulation “for good cause shown”).
Gardner v. First International Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Gardner v. First International Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
5 ¶11 In the superior court, however, Gardner never argued that Dottye negotiated the $8,000 payment in bad faith at the settlement conference.
McElhanon v. Hing 728 P.2d 256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Followed McElhanon v. Hing 728 P.2d 256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Moody v. Burton, 27 Me. 427 (1847); Klaus v. Hennessey, 13 R.I. 332 (1881).
Farmers Insurance v. R.B.L. Investment Co. 675 P.2d 1381 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Farmers Insurance v. R.B.L. Investment Co. 675 P.2d 1381 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
John A. Artukovich & Sons, Inc. v. Reliance Truck Co. 614 P.2d 327 Ariz. 1980
John A. Artukovich & Sons, Inc. v. Reliance Truck Co. 614 P.2d 327 Ariz. 1980
Harsh Building Company v. Bialac 529 P.2d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Harsh Building Company v. Bialac 529 P.2d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Guard v. County Of Maricopa, 14 Ariz.App.
Industrial Park Corp. v. U. S. I. F. Palo Verde Corp. 507 P.2d 681 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Industrial Park Corp. v. U. S. I. F. Palo Verde Corp. 507 P.2d 681 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Downs v. Shouse 501 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Downs v. Shouse 501 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Guard v. County of Maricopa 481 P.2d 873 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Guard v. County of Maricopa 481 P.2d 873 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Town of Gila Bend v. Hughes 477 P.2d 566 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Town of Gila Bend v. Hughes 477 P.2d 566 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Our Supreme Court has set forth the proper procedure for a party to seek relief from the effect of a
Gangadean v. Flori Investment Company 474 P.2d 1006 Ariz. 1970
Gangadean v. Flori Investment Company 474 P.2d 1006 Ariz. 1970
Gangadean v. FLORI INVESTMENT COMPANY 466 P.2d 63 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Gangadean v. FLORI INVESTMENT COMPANY 466 P.2d 63 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Wolf Corporation v. Louis 464 P.2d 672 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Wolf Corporation v. Louis 464 P.2d 672 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
33 A.L.R.2d 769 (1952) ; Peart v. Superior Court in and for County of Mohave, 6 Ariz.App.
Anonymous v. Anonymous 460 P.2d 32 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Anonymous v. Anonymous 460 P.2d 32 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Myers v. Rollette 439 P.2d 497 Ariz. 1968
Myers v. Rollette 439 P.2d 497 Ariz. 1968
Peart v. Superior Court 429 P.2d 498 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Peart v. Superior Court 429 P.2d 498 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Frontier Motors, Inc. v. Chick Norton Buick Co. 279 P.2d 1032 Ariz. 1955
Frontier Motors, Inc. v. Chick Norton Buick Co. 279 P.2d 1032 Ariz. 1955
f damages and that: “ * * * the proper measure of damages is the value of the Buick at the time of trial minus the payments made by the conditional buyer under the conditional sales contract plus interest at the contract rate from the date of default on the conditional sales contract to the date of judgment.” and cites in support thereof a , , 33 A.L.R.2d 769.