Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Jeune v. Del E. Webb Const. Co., 265 P.2d 1076.

32 citing documents.

Araiza v. U.S. West Business Resources, Inc. 904 P.2d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Araiza v. U.S. West Business Resources, Inc. 904 P.2d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Bonner v. Minico, Inc. 766 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1988
Bonner v. Minico, Inc. 766 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1988
Co., , a case decided less than two years after Pressley.
Circle K Corp. v. Rosenthal 574 P.2d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
Circle K Corp. v. Rosenthal 574 P.2d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
Circle K argues that there is no evidence to support the finding that the statutory notice was not posted at the time of the robbery, because the testimony of Rosenthal and a fellow employee that they did not recall having seen the notice was negative
Spear v. Industrial Commission 562 P.2d 1099 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Spear v. Industrial Commission 562 P.2d 1099 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Two days later, on September 29, 1972, she filed with the Industrial Commission a document entitled “Workmen’s Report of Injury—Provisional Application for Benefits” which concluded with the following language: “This Report of Injury and application for benefits is provisionally filed in accordance with the Arizona Superior [sic] Court cases of Jeune vs. Del Webb, [418], ; , ; , .
State v. Mayhew 555 P.2d 1132 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
State v. Mayhew 555 P.2d 1132 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
P.2d 1076 (1954); Finn v. J. H. Rose Truck Lines, 1 Ariz.App.
Townsend v. Whatton 521 P.2d 1014 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
Townsend v. Whatton 521 P.2d 1014 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
Even a non-driver may be sufficiently qualified to give an estimate of speed.
Sulpher Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Verdugo 481 P.2d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Sulpher Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Verdugo 481 P.2d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
A. No, sir.” Appellant contends this testimony was inadmissible because it consisted of negative testimony, , In re Schade’s Estate, , , 274 P. 779 (1929); , , Dalton’s Estate v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad Co., 350 Mich.
Howard P. Foley Company v. Harris 456 P.2d 398 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Howard P. Foley Company v. Harris 456 P.2d 398 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
the Arizona Supreme Court upheld a directed verdict for the employer where the only evidence available to show that notices were not posted was negative testimony by the employee’s witnesses that they had not seen any notices posted.
Brand v. JH Rose Trucking Company 427 P.2d 519 Ariz. 1967
Brand v. JH Rose Trucking Company 427 P.2d 519 Ariz. 1967
213 P. 1002 ; , 195 P. 538 , 44 A.L.R.
Coyner Crop Dusters v. Marsh 367 P.2d 208 Ariz. 1962
Coyner Crop Dusters v. Marsh 367 P.2d 208 Ariz. 1962
In Re the Estate of Schade 351 P.2d 173 Ariz. 1960
In Re the Estate of Schade 351 P.2d 173 Ariz. 1960
Casey v. Beaudry Motor Company 315 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1957
Casey v. Beaudry Motor Company 315 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1957
Upton v. East-West Realty Co. 299 P.2d 646 Ariz. 1956
Upton v. East-West Realty Co. 299 P.2d 646 Ariz. 1956
He argues that while his own testimony as to the limited authority to sell was positive and unequivocal, the only testimony negating same was without sufficient predication,, hence cannot prevail as against direct competent positive testimony, P.2d 1076 .
Jeune v. Industrial Commission 274 P.2d 85 Ariz. 1954
Picow v. Baldwin 272 P.2d 613 Ariz. 1954
Jeune v. Industrial Commission 274 P.2d 85 Ariz. 1954
On January 25, 1954, this court, , , affirmed the superior court.
Picow v. Baldwin 272 P.2d 613 Ariz. 1954
Jeune v. Del E. Webb Const. Co. 269 P.2d 723 Ariz. 1954
Jeune v. Del E. Webb Const. Co. 269 P.2d 723 Ariz. 1954