Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., 263 P.2d 308.

31 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Jaren Scott Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Jaren Scott Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
See Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., (observing party should not be “„permitted to lie in wait, take chances on a favorable verdict and, being disappointed, sally from ambush and, for the first time, complain of an improper argument in the motion for a new trial‟”), quoting Baker Hotel of Dallas, Inc. v. Rogers, 157 S.W.
Grant v. Arizona Public Service Co. 652 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Grant v. Arizona Public Service Co. 652 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co.
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. J-74449A 511 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. J-74449A 511 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , State v. Edwards, 1 Ariz.App.
State v. Forgan 505 P.2d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Forgan 505 P.2d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , .” 96 Ariz. at 33 , 391 P.2d at 589 .
Wry v. Dial 503 P.2d 979 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Wry v. Dial 503 P.2d 979 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
In Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Company, , the court stated: “ ‘ .
E. L. Jones Construction Co. v. Noland 466 P.2d 740 Ariz. 1970
E. L. Jones Construction Co. v. Noland 466 P.2d 740 Ariz. 1970
City of Mesa v. Bradshaw 462 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
City of Mesa v. Bradshaw 462 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , : “ * * * In any event it was.
Collins v. Dilcher 450 P.2d 679 Ariz. 1969
Collins v. Dilcher 450 P.2d 679 Ariz. 1969
we said: “ ‘ * * * if appellant deemed the argument so prejudicial as that neither an explanation or withdrawal by counsel, nor an instruction by the court, would have rendered the argument harmless, request should have been made to withdraw the case from the jury and discharge the panel.
Mahoney v. Frost 419 P.2d 523 Ariz. 1966
Mahoney v. Frost 419 P.2d 523 Ariz. 1966
Fulton v. Johannsen 416 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Fulton v. Johannsen 416 P.2d 983 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co.
Bailey v. Bailey 412 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Bailey v. Bailey 412 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co.
Snyder v. Beers 405 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Snyder v. Beers 405 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
This Court does not find any overreaching by defense counsel and finds nothing in this phase of the case which would cause this Court to apply a .rule different from that set forth in Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , that one cannot raise on appeal matters which were not properly presented to the trial court.
State v. Hernandez 391 P.2d 586 Ariz. 1964
State v. Hernandez 391 P.2d 586 Ariz. 1964
Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , .
Young Candy & Tobacco Company v. Montoya 372 P.2d 703 Ariz. 1962
Young Candy & Tobacco Company v. Montoya 372 P.2d 703 Ariz. 1962
See Bruno v. *369 San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , .
Bryan v. Southern Pacific Company 286 P.2d 761 Ariz. 1955
Mong Ming Club v. Tang 266 P.2d 1091 Ariz. 1954
Mong Ming Club v. Tang 266 P.2d 1091 Ariz. 1954
.In the case of Bruno v. San Xavier Rock & Sand Co., , , this court said: “ * * *• it was plaintiffs’ duty to make a proper record upon which to predicate their appeal to this court.