Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY, ETC. v. Cannon, 342 P.2d 207.

69 citing documents.

City of Tucson v. LaForge 446 P.2d 692 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
City of Tucson v. LaForge 446 P.2d 692 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Board of Regents, , State ex rel.
State Ex Rel. Herman v. Lopez 442 P.2d 884 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
State Ex Rel. Herman v. Lopez 442 P.2d 884 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
In Board of Regents, , the Supreme Court stated the rule that it is well-established law that an owner of property is always competent to testify as to its value.
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 428 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 428 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
County of Maricopa v. Shell Oil Co., 84 Ariz: 325, .
Carrel v. Lux 420 P.2d 564 Ariz. 1966
Carrel v. Lux 420 P.2d 564 Ariz. 1966
The lower court determined Mr. Howell was qualified and as we stated in Board of Regents of University, , , 209: “The question of whether any witness, whether or not designated ‘expert’ is competent to testify on a given subject rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, and its exercise will not be reviewed but for abuse.
Spector v. Spector 382 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1963
Spector v. Spector 382 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1963
State v. Hollis 379 P.2d 750 Ariz. 1963
Higgins v. Arizona Savings and Loan Association 365 P.2d 476 Ariz. 1961
Higgins v. Arizona Savings and Loan Association 365 P.2d 476 Ariz. 1961
This court stated in Board of Regents of University, etc. v. Cannon, 1959, , , 209: “The question of whether any witness, whether or not designated ‘expert’ is competent to testify on a given subject rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, and its exercise will not be reviewed but for abuse.” The witnesses, Smrt and Dick, were both officers of the appellee and fam
Parker v. State Ex Rel. Church 359 P.2d 63 Ariz. 1961
Parker v. State Ex Rel. Church 359 P.2d 63 Ariz. 1961
State Ex Rel. Morrison v. Jay Six Cattle Co. 353 P.2d 185 Ariz. 1960
State Ex Rel. Morrison v. Jay Six Cattle Co. 353 P.2d 185 Ariz. 1960
209: “The question of whether any witness, whether or not designated ‘expert’ is competent to testify on a given subject rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, and its exercise will not be reviewed but for abuse.” The fact that there were few prior relevant sales in the area and that t
State v. McDonald 352 P.2d 343 Ariz. 1960
State v. McDonald 352 P.2d 343 Ariz. 1960
We held, in Board of Regents of University, , , that a layman so qualified might, in the discretion of the trial court, be allowed to offer his opinion as an expert.