Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite McNutt Oil & Refining Company v. D'ASCOLI, 281 P.2d 966.

27 citing documents.

McAlister v. Loeb Ariz. 2025
McAlister v. Loeb Ariz. 2025
Co. v. D’Ascoli, –34 (1955); –36 (1963).
Weigele v. Oliver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Weigele v. Oliver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Calabrese v. Fortin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Calabrese v. Fortin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
5 CALABRESE v. FORTIN et al. Decision of the Court McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, ).
Felder v. Physiotherapy Associates 158 P.3d 877 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Felder v. Physiotherapy Associates 158 P.3d 877 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
This court stated in McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , that “conjecture or speculation” cannot provide the basis for an award of damages, and said in Martin v. LaFon, [ , ] that the evidence must make “an approximately accurate estimate” possible.
Crown Holding Corp. v. Larson 410 N.W.2d 373 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital 710 P.2d 1025 Ariz. 1985
Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital 710 P.2d 1025 Ariz. 1985
We have since allowed a cause of action for interference with a lease agreement, , for inducing breach of a restrictive covenant, McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , for interference with an agency contract, , and for interference with business relationships
Huggins v. Deinhard 621 P.2d 45 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Huggins v. Deinhard 621 P.2d 45 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , Restatement (Second) of Torts § 908 (1979).
Chanay v. Chittenden 563 P.2d 287 Ariz. 1977
Chanay v. Chittenden 563 P.2d 287 Ariz. 1977
McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli
Richard H. Huff Realty, Inc. v. Andrews 564 P.2d 93 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
Richard H. Huff Realty, Inc. v. Andrews 564 P.2d 93 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
There was no showing that the conduct of Mr. Huff and Mr. Stewart was “wrongful, wilful and malicious in fact.” McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli
Middleton v. Wallichs Music & Entertainment Co. 536 P.2d 1072 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Middleton v. Wallichs Music & Entertainment Co. 536 P.2d 1072 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
438 , (2) the defendant’s knowledge thereof, McNutt Oil & Refin *183 ing Co. v. D’Ascoli, , (3) a breach of the contract induced by the defendant, Equitable Life & Casualty Insurance Co., Inc. v. Rutledge, 9 Ariz.App.
Pre-Fit Door, Inc. v. Dor-Ways, Inc. 477 P.2d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Pre-Fit Door, Inc. v. Dor-Ways, Inc. 477 P.2d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , , ; , Equitable Life & Casualty Ins.
Harris Cattle Co. v. Madison Chevrolet, Inc. 438 P.2d 434 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Harris Cattle Co. v. Madison Chevrolet, Inc. 438 P.2d 434 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Among the opinions are: , 288 P. 1029 (1930); , 192 P. 249 (1920); , McNutt Oil & Refining Company v. D’Ascoli, , , , , 11 A.L.R.3d 714 (1963).
Gilmore v. Cohen 386 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1963
Gilmore v. Cohen 386 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1963
This court stated in McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , that “conjecture or speculation” cannot provide the basis for an award of damages, and said in Martin v. LaFon, supra, that the evidence must make an “approximately accurate estimate” possible.
A. R. A. Manufacturing Co. v. Pierce 341 P.2d 928 Ariz. 1959
A. R. A. Manufacturing Co. v. Pierce 341 P.2d 928 Ariz. 1959
McNutt Oil & Refining Co. v. D’Ascoli, , .