Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Arizona Corp. Commission v. Fred Harvey Transportation Co., 388 P.2d 236.

34 citing documents.

Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Shah v. Az Brd Dental Exam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 177 P.3d 1224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 177 P.3d 1224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
2 *657 ¶ 15 , in deciding whether the superior court had correctly ruled that two motor service carriers could operate over the same route.
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Co., , (holding superior court lacked authority to remand to Commission).
Shelby School v. Arizona State Board of Education 962 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Shelby School v. Arizona State Board of Education 962 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Co., , (court cannot supersede essential function of another public body)
Havasu Heights Ranch & Development Corp. v. State Land Department 764 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Havasu Heights Ranch & Development Corp. v. State Land Department 764 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
See Arizona Corporation Comm’n v. Fred Harvey Transportation Co., , (superior court may not exercise or supersede an essential function of another public body).
Electrical District No. 2 v. Arizona Corp. Commission 745 P.2d 1383 Ariz. 1987
Electrical District No. 2 v. Arizona Corp. Commission 745 P.2d 1383 Ariz. 1987
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Navopache Electric Co-Op, Inc. 727 P.2d 813 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Navopache Electric Co-Op, Inc. 727 P.2d 813 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Tucson Electric Power Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 645 P.2d 231 Ariz. 1982
Tucson Electric Power Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 645 P.2d 231 Ariz. 1982
Lofersky v. Needel, supra.
Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 556 P.2d 1126 Ariz. 1976
Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 556 P.2d 1126 Ariz. 1976
Fernandez v. Arizona Water Co. 516 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Fernandez v. Arizona Water Co. 516 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Herzberg v. State Ex Rel. Humphrey 513 P.2d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Herzberg v. State Ex Rel. Humphrey 513 P.2d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Sulger v. Arizona Corporation Commission, 5 Ariz.App.
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 428 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 428 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
§ 40-254) led this court, , , to conclude: “ * * * the hearing before the superior court is de novo and we have construed this to mean the superior court must exercise an ‘independent judgment’.
Smith v. Lassen 423 P.2d 136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Smith v. Lassen 423 P.2d 136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Sulger v. Arizona Corporation Commission 423 P.2d 145 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Sulger v. Arizona Corporation Commission 423 P.2d 145 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 416 P.2d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
State Land Department v. Painted Desert Park, Inc. 416 P.2d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Co., , to conclude: “ * * * the hearing before the superior court is de novo and we have construed this to mean the superior court must exercise an ‘independent judgment’.
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Tucson Insurance & Bonding Agency 415 P.2d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Tucson Insurance & Bonding Agency 415 P.2d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Corporation Commission v. Southern Pac.
Tucson Warehouse & Transfer Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 410 P.2d 683 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Tucson Warehouse & Transfer Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 410 P.2d 683 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966