Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Matlow v. Matlow, 361 P.2d 648.

42 citing documents.

Ansley v. Banner Health 419 P.3d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ansley v. Banner Health 419 P.3d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
("In the absence of an obligation to be secured there can be no lien.").
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. v. Arizona HOA Acceptance LLC 369 P.3d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. v. Arizona HOA Acceptance LLC 369 P.3d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
And, then as now, a lien is a “hold or claim which one person has upon the property of another as a security for some debt or charge.” Compare Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1978 (8th ed. 1914), -98 , (“The term ‘lien’, as generally used, is a charge or encumbrance upon property to secure the payment or performance of a debt, duty, or other obligation”) (citation omitted); Lien, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014) (lien is “[a] legal right or interest that a creditor has in ano
State v. Andrus Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Andrus Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
The term “lien,” as generally used, refers to “a charge or encumbrance upon property to secure the payment or performance of a debt, duty, or other obligation.” –98
Blankenbaker v. Jonovich 71 P.3d 910 Ariz. 2003
Blankenbaker v. Jonovich 71 P.3d 910 Ariz. 2003
(“In the absence of an obligation to be secured there can be no lien.”).
Andrews v. Samaritan Health System 36 P.3d 57 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Andrews v. Samaritan Health System 36 P.3d 57 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
In the absence of an obligation to be secured there can be no lien.” -98 , (citations omitted).
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System v. Bentley 928 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System v. Bentley 928 P.2d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
The term “lien” generally “is a charge or encumbrance upon property to secure the payment or performance of a debt, duty, or other obligation,” and it “is distinct from the obligation which it secures.” -98 , (citing 53 C.J.S.
State v. O'CONNOR 827 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. O'CONNOR 827 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Mathis v. Liquor Board 707 P.2d 974 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Mathis v. Liquor Board 707 P.2d 974 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State Ex Rel. LaSota v. Corcoran 583 P.2d 229 Ariz. 1978
State Ex Rel. LaSota v. Corcoran 583 P.2d 229 Ariz. 1978
McElwain v. Schuckert, 13 Ariz.App.
State v. Fox 542 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1975
State v. Fox 542 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1975
See State v. Hostler, supra-, P.2d 648 (1961).
Becchelli v. Becchelli 497 P.2d 396 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Becchelli v. Becchelli 497 P.2d 396 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
.” ( 104 Ariz. at 23 , 448 P.2d at 79 ).
Wick v. Wick 489 P.2d 19 Ariz. 1971
Wick v. Wick 489 P.2d 19 Ariz. 1971
McElwain v. Schuckert 477 P.2d 754 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
McElwain v. Schuckert 477 P.2d 754 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Rexing v. Rexing 464 P.2d 356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Rexing v. Rexing 464 P.2d 356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Brown v. Brown, supra; see also 4 Ariz.L.Rev.
Calderon v. Calderon 454 P.2d 586 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Calderon v. Calderon 454 P.2d 586 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Costanzo v. Stewart 453 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Costanzo v. Stewart 453 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
It is distinct from the obligation which it secures.’ ” Matlow c. Matlow, , , in an action to foreclose a lien, the lower court held the lien was not perfected but entered a personal judgment against the property owner.
Nace v. Nace 448 P.2d 76 Ariz. 1968
Nace v. Nace 448 P.2d 76 Ariz. 1968
State v. Narten 407 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1965
State v. Narten 407 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1965
Moore v. Moore 403 P.2d 823 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Moore v. Moore 403 P.2d 823 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
* * * In considering the social aspects of matrimony, it would be contrary to public policy to insist on the maintenance of a marriage which has utterly broken down with admittedly no likelihood of a reconciliation.” Matlow v. Matlow, 89 Ariz. *421 293 , at 296 and 297, at 650 (1961).
Hanner v. Hanner 388 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1964
Hanner v. Hanner 388 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1964
Spector v. Spector 382 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1963
Spector v. Spector 382 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1963