Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Peterson v. Valley National Bank of Phoenix, 368 P.2d 317.

106 citing documents.

Hall v. Elected Officials' Retirement Plan 383 P.3d 1107 Ariz. 2016
Olariu v. Gibbons Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Olariu v. Gibbons Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Bank of Phoenix, as applying a standard more favorable to a plaintiff.
Vig v. Nix Project II Partnership 212 P.3d 85 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Vig v. Nix Project II Partnership 212 P.3d 85 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
596, 598 , (quoting Peterson v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Phoenix, , ).
Orme School v. Reeves 802 P.2d 1000 Ariz. 1990
Orme School v. Reeves 802 P.2d 1000 Ariz. 1990
is not a substitute for a trial” and “litigants are entitled to the right of trial where there is the slightest doubt as to the facts.” , see also Chiara v. Fry’s Food Stores, Inc.
Douglas v. Wilson 774 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Douglas v. Wilson 774 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
Webster v. Culbertson 761 P.2d 1063 Ariz. 1988
Webster v. Culbertson 761 P.2d 1063 Ariz. 1988
Id.; Peterson v. Valley Nat’l. Bank of Phoenix
Wagner v. City of Globe 722 P.2d 250 Ariz. 1986
Wagner v. City of Globe 722 P.2d 250 Ariz. 1986
Summary judgment is not proper where there is the slightest doubt as to the facts, Peterson v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Phoenix, , and even where the facts are undisputed, summary judgment is not proper if the evidence is of such a character that reasonable minds could draw different conclusions or inferences therefrom.
Madsen Ex Rel. Corbin v. Western American Mortgage Co. 694 P.2d 1228 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Madsen Ex Rel. Corbin v. Western American Mortgage Co. 694 P.2d 1228 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Facit-Addo, Inc. v. Davis Financial Corp. 653 P.2d 356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Facit-Addo, Inc. v. Davis Financial Corp. 653 P.2d 356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
In sum, the material facts on the present record are not beyond “the slightest doubt.”
City of Phoenix v. South Bank Corp. 649 P.2d 293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
City of Phoenix v. South Bank Corp. 649 P.2d 293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Mid-Century Insurance v. Duzykowski 641 P.2d 1272 Ariz. 1982
Mid-Century Insurance v. Duzykowski 641 P.2d 1272 Ariz. 1982
Cooper v. ARIZONA WESTERN COLLEGE, ETC. 610 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Cooper v. ARIZONA WESTERN COLLEGE, ETC. 610 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Pendleton v. Cilley 574 P.2d 1303 Ariz. 1978
Pendleton v. Cilley 574 P.2d 1303 Ariz. 1978
Cavanagh v. Schaefer 545 P.2d 416 Ariz. 1976
Cavanagh v. Schaefer 545 P.2d 416 Ariz. 1976
olving the question as to whether summary judgment should be granted, the trial court does not weigh the evidence, nor do we; but the pleadings, affidavits, depositions and admissions, if any, must be viewed in the most favorable aspect they will bear in support of the right of the party opposing the motion to a trial of the issues, [citation omitted]” , 368 P.2d317, 318 (1962).
Savoca Masonry Co., Inc. v. Homes & Son Const. Co. 542 P.2d 817 Ariz. 1975
Savoca Masonry Co., Inc. v. Homes & Son Const. Co. 542 P.2d 817 Ariz. 1975
Geiler v. Arizona Bank 537 P.2d 994 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Geiler v. Arizona Bank 537 P.2d 994 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Reidy v. Almich, 4 Ariz.App.
City of Phoenix v. Space Data Corporation 534 P.2d 428 Ariz. 1975
City of Phoenix v. Space Data Corporation 534 P.2d 428 Ariz. 1975
Ohlinger Industries, Inc. v. Anderson 512 P.2d 599 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Ohlinger Industries, Inc. v. Anderson 512 P.2d 599 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Hall v. Motorists Insurance Corporation 509 P.2d 604 Ariz. 1973
Hall v. Motorists Insurance Corporation 509 P.2d 604 Ariz. 1973
Union Bank v. Pfeffer 502 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Union Bank v. Pfeffer 502 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Ramsouer v. Midland Valley R. Co., 135 F.2d 101 (8th Cir. 1943)
Beeck v. Tucson General Hospital 500 P.2d 1153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Beeck v. Tucson General Hospital 500 P.2d 1153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
supplemented on rehearing, , 461 P.2d *167 675 (1969)
Panagiotis v. Miltiades 497 P.2d 77 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Panagiotis v. Miltiades 497 P.2d 77 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
“Litigants are entitled to the right of trial where there is the slightest doubt as to the facts.” at 362 , at 318 (1962).
Garling v. Seeley 494 P.2d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Garling v. Seeley 494 P.2d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Livingston v. Citizen's Utility, Inc. 481 P.2d 855 Ariz. 1971
Livingston v. Citizen's Utility, Inc. 481 P.2d 855 Ariz. 1971
Day v. Wiswall 467 P.2d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Day v. Wiswall 467 P.2d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Nielson v. Savoy 464 P.2d 608 Ariz. 1970