DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Marquez v. Rapid Harvest Co., 409 P.2d 285.

66 citing documents.

  • Campbell v. Frazer Construction Co. 451 P.2d 620 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
    It is the established law of this state that default judgments are not favored, Ramada Inns, Inc. v. Lane and Bird Advertising, Inc., , and, if there is “any doubt” as to whether a default should be set aside, it must be resolved in favor of the application
  • Del Castillo v. Harbour 445 P.2d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
  • Del Castillo v. Harbour 445 P.2d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
    See, e. g., Ramada Inns, Inc. v. Lane and Bird Advertising, Inc.
  • Camacho v. Gardner 435 P.2d 719 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
  • Camacho v. Gardner 435 P.2d 719 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
    Though these two rules use different language as to the test for granting relief, in the many decisions in this state pertaining to the setting aside of a default and default judgment, no distinction has ever been made which would suggest that the trial court has any discretion in separating the default from the default judg *592 ment on such a motion, i. e., , , , , , -432 , 234 P. 32 (1925)
  • Walter v. Northern Arizona Title Co. 433 P.2d 998 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
  • Walter v. Northern Arizona Title Co. 433 P.2d 998 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
  • Goodman's Markets, Inc. v. Ward 421 P.2d 538 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
  • Goodman's Markets, Inc. v. Ward 421 P.2d 538 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
  • Hansen v. Brugliera 417 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
  • Hansen v. Brugliera 417 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
    469 , and our Supreme Court has recently stated: “Where no intervening rights have attached in reliance upon the judgment, any doubt should be resolved in favor of securing a trial upon the merits.” at 366 , , at 287 (1965).
  • C. Meisel Music Company v. Perl 415 P.2d 575 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
  • C. Meisel Music Company v. Perl 415 P.2d 575 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
  • Kohlbeck v. Handley 415 P.2d 483 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
  • Kohlbeck v. Handley 415 P.2d 483 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
  • Mann v. Hennessey 409 P.2d 597 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
    The Supreme Court on December 31, 1965 in the case of Marquez v. Rapid Harvest, Ariz., , in upholding the action of the trial court in setting aside a default said: “This follows the general rule that any doubt which may exist should be resolved in favor of the application, to the end of securing a trial upon the merits.