Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Lenslite Co. v. Zocher, 388 P.2d 421.

32 citing documents.

Francine C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Francine C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Elliott, 165 Ariz. at 134
United Metro Materials, Inc. v. Pena Blanca Properties, L.L.C. 4 P.3d 1022 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
United Metro Materials, Inc. v. Pena Blanca Properties, L.L.C. 4 P.3d 1022 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
-60 , 213 P. 391, 393-94 (1923).
Cashway Concrete & Materials v. Sanner Contracting Co. 761 P.2d 155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Cashway Concrete & Materials v. Sanner Contracting Co. 761 P.2d 155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
American National Fire Insurance v. Esquire Labs of Arizona, Inc. 694 P.2d 800 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
American National Fire Insurance v. Esquire Labs of Arizona, Inc. 694 P.2d 800 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Bender v. Bender 597 P.2d 993 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Bender v. Bender 597 P.2d 993 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
16 A.R.S., Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 52(a)
Starkovich v. Noye 529 P.2d 698 Ariz. 1974
Starkovich v. Noye 529 P.2d 698 Ariz. 1974
*353 While Rule 44 (q) was adopted from the Uniform Business Records as- Evidence Act, , and its purpose was to liberalize the rules of admitting records into evidence, there is still the express requirement that a record- must be made “in the regular course of business” in order to avoid the claim of hearsay.
Van Campen v. Upjohn Company 504 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
Van Campen v. Upjohn Company 504 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
Sato v. First Nat’l Bank, 12 Ariz.App.
Corbin-Dykes Electric Company v. Burr 500 P.2d 632 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Corbin-Dykes Electric Company v. Burr 500 P.2d 632 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Coury Bros. Ranches, , ; , ; , 276 P. 523 (1929).
American Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Bel-Aire Interiors, Inc. 469 P.2d 75 Ariz. 1970
American Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Bel-Aire Interiors, Inc. 469 P.2d 75 Ariz. 1970
Kolberg v. McKean's Model Laundry & Dry Cleaning Co. 454 P.2d 867 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Kolberg v. McKean's Model Laundry & Dry Cleaning Co. 454 P.2d 867 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
King Realty, Inc. v. Grantwood Cemeteries, Inc., supra.
Kemp v. Pinal County 442 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Kemp v. Pinal County 442 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
O'Brien v. Superior Court in and for Maricopa Co. 435 P.2d 44 Ariz. 1967
O'Brien v. Superior Court in and for Maricopa Co. 435 P.2d 44 Ariz. 1967
Although Rule 52(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 16 A.R.S., only requires that the trial court make findings of fact and conclusions of law when the parties make a timely request for them, , ; , nevertheless .there are instances when the trial court must make findings.
Feighner v. Clarke 419 P.2d 513 Ariz. 1966
Feighner v. Clarke 419 P.2d 513 Ariz. 1966
Myers-Leiber Sign Co. v. Weirich 410 P.2d 491 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Myers-Leiber Sign Co. v. Weirich 410 P.2d 491 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
: “A trial judge is not required to find facts or state expressly his conclusions of law unless request is made therefor.” The Kazal case can be of no solace to the appellant.
McDermott v. O'Brien 409 P.2d 588 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
McDermott v. O'Brien 409 P.2d 588 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Uhlmann v. Wren 401 P.2d 113 Ariz. 1965
Uhlmann v. Wren 401 P.2d 113 Ariz. 1965