Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Condos v. Felder, 377 P.2d 305.
- Dominguez v. rowland/vandermeer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
-
Dominguez v. rowland/vandermeer
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
A confidential relationship can be formed if there is “great intimacy, disclosure of secrets, [e]ntrusting of power, and superiority of position in the case of the representative.”
- Turley v. Ethington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
- Turley v. Ethington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
- Taeger v. CATHOLIC FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVS. 995 P.2d 721 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
-
Taeger v. CATHOLIC FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVS.
995 P.2d 721
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
: There is no uniform practice among the courts in their use of the phrases “fiduciary relation” and “confidential relation.” In many decisions the words are used as synonyms.
- Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse 945 P.2d 317 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
-
Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse
945 P.2d 317
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
A fiduciary relationship is a confidential relationship whose attributes include “great intimacy, disclosure of secrets, [or] intrusting of power.” Rhoads, 145 Ariz. at 149 , 700 P.2d at 847 ( , ).
- Gonzalez v. Gonzalez 887 P.2d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
- Gonzalez v. Gonzalez 887 P.2d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
- Troutman v. Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona 826 P.2d 810 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
-
Troutman v. Valley Nat. Bank of Arizona
826 P.2d 810
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
-72 , Mahan v. First Nat’l Bank
- Mister Donut of America, Inc. v. Harris 723 P.2d 670 Ariz. 1986
- Mister Donut of America, Inc. v. Harris 723 P.2d 670 Ariz. 1986
- Mister Donut of America, Inc. v. Harris 723 P.2d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
-
Mister Donut of America, Inc. v. Harris
723 P.2d 696
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Guerin v. American Smelting & Refining Co., , 236 P. 684 (1925); Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc.
- Transamerica Insurance v. Trout 701 P.2d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
- Transamerica Insurance v. Trout 701 P.2d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
- Rhoads v. Harvey Publications, Inc. 700 P.2d 840 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
-
Rhoads v. Harvey Publications, Inc.
700 P.2d 840
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
(partner and illiterate partner); , (broker and client); , (family relationship); , (real estate agent and principal); Haymes v. Rogers, 70 Ari
- Mahan v. First Nat. Bank of Arizona 677 P.2d 301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
- Mahan v. First Nat. Bank of Arizona 677 P.2d 301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
- Raestle v. Whitson 582 P.2d 170 Ariz. 1978
- Raestle v. Whitson 582 P.2d 170 Ariz. 1978
- Cachenos v. Baumann 544 P.2d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
- Cachenos v. Baumann 544 P.2d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
- Norman v. Transamerica Title Insurance 493 P.2d 112 Ariz. 1972
-
Norman v. Transamerica Title Insurance
493 P.2d 112
Ariz. 1972
It is a remedial device, , used whenever title to property has been obtained through actual fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, undue influence, duress, or through any other means which render it unconscionable for the holder of legal title to continue to retain and enjoy its beneficial interest.
- L. M. White Contracting Co. v. Tucson Rock & Sand Co. 466 P.2d 413 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
-
L. M. White Contracting Co. v. Tucson Rock & Sand Co.
466 P.2d 413
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
3 Bogert Trusts and Trustees, 2nd Edition, § 472.
- King v. Uhlmann 437 P.2d 928 Ariz. 1968
-
King v. Uhlmann
437 P.2d 928
Ariz. 1968
378, 380, 381 .” 100 Ariz. at 58 , 410 P.2d at 665 , , this court had the problem of determining whether the facts justified a finding of an implied fraud, and in that case adopted language from Bogert on Trusts and Trustees, 1946 Ed., Vol.
- Peterson v. First National Bank 417 P.2d 728 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
- In Re Estate of MacDonald 417 P.2d 728 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
- In Re Estate of MacDonald 417 P.2d 728 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
-
Peterson v. First National Bank
417 P.2d 728
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
The testimony establishing Felder’s case is not that of himself or other parties to the action but rather that of disinterested neighbors and friends.” at 372