Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Stevens v. Mehagian's Home Furnishings, Inc., 365 P.2d 208.

112 citing documents.

Hernandez v. Athey 541 P.3d 601 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Hernandez v. Athey 541 P.3d 601 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Cont'l Cas., 130 Ariz. at 191 (cleaned up) (quoting Stevens v. Mehagian's Home Furnishings, Inc., ).
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
And—not least as a means to clarify appealability of a ruling that would not otherwise be appealable, see Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., —the rule requires an “express determination” of no just reason for delay and a recital of entry pursuant to Rule 54(b).
Hoyer v. Dougherty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Hoyer v. Dougherty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
See Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., see also Ariz. R. Civ.
Jaynes v. McConnell 358 P.3d 632 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Jaynes v. McConnell 358 P.3d 632 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
42, 44-45, (explaining that an action involving multiple claims or defendants is treated as one judicial unit, and until the court has disposed of all claims against all parties, the judgment is not final).
Demaree v. Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Demaree v. Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Moreover, since the original judgment did not contain Rule 54(b) certification, it was “subject to [the court’s] own modification at any time before the final adjudication of all the claims.” Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Madrid v. Avalon Care Center-Chandler, L.L.C. 338 P.3d 328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Madrid v. Avalon Care Center-Chandler, L.L.C. 338 P.3d 328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Baker v. Bradley 296 P.3d 1011 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Baker v. Bradley 296 P.3d 1011 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
220, 221 , (explaining that an unsigned minute entry is not a judgment and the court can alter the rulings contained therein prior to or at time of entry of the final judgment); see also Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , (confirming that even a signed judgment that does not adjudicate all claims and does not have Rule 54(b) language is subject to modification at any time before entry of the final judgment); Rule 54(b) (absent language of finality, a judgment that does not determine
Fields v. Oates 286 P.3d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Fields v. Oates 286 P.3d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
P. Rule 54(b) (“the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties”) 3 ; Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , , (citing Stevens and explaining that when “there are outstanding claims remaining to be adjudi *415 cated in an action in the superior court, the lack of a 54(b) determination defeats finality”).
Ghadimi v. Soraya 285 P.3d 969 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Ghadimi v. Soraya 285 P.3d 969 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
See also Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., -45 , -10 (1961) (stating that when there is at least one outstanding claim and the superior court has not included Rule 54(b) language, the judgment is subject to modification and not final); , (citing Stevens and noting that the
Penny Osuna v. Walmart Stores, Inc. Sam's Club Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Penny Osuna v. Walmart Stores, Inc. Sam's Club Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
an opportunity to apply to the trial court for the necessary determination.” Arizona Bank v. Superior Court, 17 Ariz. App. 115, 119-20, -27 (1972); see also Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., Tarnoff v. Jones, 15 Ariz. App. 88, 90
Whiteco Outdoor Advertising v. City of Tucson 972 P.2d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Whiteco Outdoor Advertising v. City of Tucson 972 P.2d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
§ 12-2101; Stevens v. Mehagian's Home Furnishings, Inc.
Hall Family Properties, Ltd. v. Gosnell Development Corp. 916 P.2d 1098 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Hall Family Properties, Ltd. v. Gosnell Development Corp. 916 P.2d 1098 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Because we inquire sua sponte into our own jurisdiction, Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , we dispose of an issue the parties did not raise.
Davis v. Cessna Aircraft Corp. 812 P.2d 1119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Davis v. Cessna Aircraft Corp. 812 P.2d 1119 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Egan-Ryan Mechanical Co. v. Cardon Meadows Development Corp. 818 P.2d 146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Egan-Ryan Mechanical Co. v. Cardon Meadows Development Corp. 818 P.2d 146 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , (citations omitted).
Sisemore v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 779 P.2d 1303 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Sisemore v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 779 P.2d 1303 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Davis v. Davis 691 P.2d 1102 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Davis v. Davis 691 P.2d 1102 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Terrazas v. Superior Court, County of Maricopa, Division Five, , Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Matter of Estate of Kerr 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Valley National Bank v. Dykstra 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Matter of Estate of Kerr 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Stevens v. Mehagian's Home Furnishings, Inc.
Valley National Bank v. Dykstra 667 P.2d 1351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , Searles v. Haldiman, 3 Ariz.App.
Musa v. C. K. Adrian, M. D. 636 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1981
Musa v. C. K. Adrian, M. D. 636 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1981
Stevens v. Mehagi-an’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , Marshall v. Williams, supra.
Continental Cas. v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 635 P.2d 174 Ariz. 1981
Continental Cas. v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 635 P.2d 174 Ariz. 1981
In Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , we observed that, “[r]ule 54(b) is designed to make an accommodation between the policy against piecemeal appeals, (citations omitted), and the problems that have arisen under the liberalized joinder of claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, and third-party claims in one suit permitted by our rule
Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona v. Meneghin 634 P.2d 570 Ariz. 1981
Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona v. Meneghin 634 P.2d 570 Ariz. 1981
The judgment did not, however, dispose of cross-claims between appellants and their co-defendants and did not contain a Rule 54(b) determination; 1 hence, the judgment was not a final judgment under the holding in Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Musa v. C. K. Adrian, M.D. 636 P.2d 104 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc., , (Oct.
Pulaski v. Perkins 619 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Pulaski v. Perkins 619 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Title Insurance Co. of Minnesota v. Acumen Trading Co. 591 P.2d 1302 Ariz. 1979
Title Insurance Co. of Minnesota v. Acumen Trading Co. 591 P.2d 1302 Ariz. 1979
Stevens v. Mehagian’s Home Furnishings, Inc.
Markiewicz v. SALT RIVER VALLEY, ETC. 576 P.2d 517 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by