Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Wilson v. Byrd, 288 P.2d 1079.

32 citing documents.

Ridley v. Ridley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ridley v. Ridley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Spudnuts, (noting that the standard "is the same whether fraud is claimed as a basis of an action for damages or as a defense") (-07 (1955) ("If the allegation and proof of fraud was insufficient as a counterclaim it was also insufficient as a defense .
Moore v. Toshiba International Corp. 772 P.2d 28 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Moore v. Toshiba International Corp. 772 P.2d 28 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
McElhanon v. Hing 728 P.2d 256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
McElhanon v. Hing 728 P.2d 256 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Spudnuts, Inc. v. Lane 641 P.2d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Spudnuts, Inc. v. Lane 641 P.2d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
Lewis v. Swenson 617 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Lewis v. Swenson 617 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
School District No. 9 v. First National Bank, , Home Insurance Co. v. Balfour-Guthrie Insurance Co., 13 Ariz.App.
Ries v. McComb 545 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Ries v. McComb 545 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Home Insurance Co. v. Balfour-Guthrie Ins. Co. 476 P.2d 533 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Home Insurance Co. v. Balfour-Guthrie Ins. Co. 476 P.2d 533 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Nielson v. Flashberg 419 P.2d 514 Ariz. 1966
Nielson v. Flashberg 419 P.2d 514 Ariz. 1966
(rehearing denied , ); , ; , 64 P.2
Contractor & Mining Service & Supply, Inc. v. H & M Tractor & Bearing Corp. 417 P.2d 542 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Contractor & Mining Service & Supply, Inc. v. H & M Tractor & Bearing Corp. 417 P.2d 542 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Gallagher v. Viking Supply Corporation 411 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Gallagher v. Viking Supply Corporation 411 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Cullison v. Pride O’Texas Citrus Association
Godfrey v. Navratil 411 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Godfrey v. Navratil 411 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Cullison v. Pride O’Texas Citrus Association
Lehman v. Whitehead 403 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Lehman v. Whitehead 403 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Swift v. City of Phoenix 367 P.2d 791 Ariz. 1961
Swift v. City of Phoenix 367 P.2d 791 Ariz. 1961
Cullison v. Pride O'Texas Citrus Association 355 P.2d 898 Ariz. 1960
Cullison v. Pride O'Texas Citrus Association 355 P.2d 898 Ariz. 1960
It is fundamental in this jurisdiction that “there can be no actionable fraud without a concurrence of all the elements thereof.” , .
Poley v. Bender 347 P.2d 696 Ariz. 1959
Poley v. Bender 347 P.2d 696 Ariz. 1959
Sult v. Bolenbach 327 P.2d 1023 Ariz. 1958
Sult v. Bolenbach 327 P.2d 1023 Ariz. 1958
tate, , ; , ; , ; , ; and that it has certain necessary elements, , ; Rice v. Tissaw, supra; In re McDonnell’s Estate, supra; , ; , , one being that the complaining party must rely upon the fraudulent acts or representations.