Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Higgins v. Arizona Savings and Loan Association, 365 P.2d 476.

66 citing documents.

Tanner v. Pacioni 413 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Tanner v. Pacioni 413 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Higgins v. Arizona Savings and Loan Ass’n
Jamison v. Southern States Life Insurance Company 412 P.2d 306 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Jamison v. Southern States Life Insurance Company 412 P.2d 306 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Restatement, Contracts § 228.
O'Rielly Motor Company v. Rich 411 P.2d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
O'Rielly Motor Company v. Rich 411 P.2d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
The trial judge has great discretion in the conduct and control of the trial proceedings, Higgins v. Arizona Savings and Loan Ass’n, , and the responsibility for confining the conduct of counsel within the limits of legitimate advocacy is primarily his.
Snyder v. Beers 405 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Snyder v. Beers 405 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
City of Phoenix v. Boggs 403 P.2d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
City of Phoenix v. Boggs 403 P.2d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
The trial judge is invested with considerable discretion in determining the relevancy and admissibility of evidence, , and when testimony properly goes to any issue of a case, even though it may indirectly affect another issue, or where there are sufficient facts upon which a jury may arrive at a verdict justifiable under some theory of law, we will not disturb the judgment without a showing that there has been
Olympic Land Co., Inc. v. Smithart 400 P.2d 846 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Olympic Land Co., Inc. v. Smithart 400 P.2d 846 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Finn v. J. H. Rose Truck Lines 398 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Finn v. J. H. Rose Truck Lines 398 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Gilmore v. Cohen 386 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1963
Gilmore v. Cohen 386 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1963
Higgins v. Arizona Savings & Loan Ass’n, , ; A. R. A. Mfg.