Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Employment Security Commission of Arizona v. Fish, 375 P.2d 20.

47 citing documents.

Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp. 354 P.3d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp. 354 P.3d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Comm’n , (emphasis added); see also Beazer Homes Ariz., ¶ 14 , (The “general purpose of licensing contractors” is “to regulate the *552 conduct of contracting and protect the public from unscrupulous acts.”).
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co v. Arizona Department of Transportation 838 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co v. Arizona Department of Transportation 838 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Comm’n v. Fish, , in which the Arizona Supreme Court held that a contractor’s license bond issued pursuant to A.R.S.
Brown Wholesale Electric Co. v. Merchants Mutual Bonding Co. 713 P.2d 291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Brown Wholesale Electric Co. v. Merchants Mutual Bonding Co. 713 P.2d 291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
With this factual predicate, , wherein our Supreme Court stated: It is so axiomatic as to need no citation that the object of statutory interpretation is to determine the meaning and intent of the legislature.
Ariz. Civil Rights Div. v. Hughes Air Corp. 678 P.2d 494 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Ariz. Civil Rights Div. v. Hughes Air Corp. 678 P.2d 494 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Richards v. Powercraft Homes, Inc. 678 P.2d 449 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Amphitheater Unified School District 10 v. Harte 624 P.2d 1281 Ariz. 1981
Amphitheater Unified School District 10 v. Harte 624 P.2d 1281 Ariz. 1981
B. J. Cecil Trucking, Inc. v. Tiffany Construction Co. 597 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
B. J. Cecil Trucking, Inc. v. Tiffany Construction Co. 597 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
The evolution of the contractor’s
E. L. Farmer Construction Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 560 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
E. L. Farmer Construction Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. 560 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Michigan Bank 556 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Michigan Bank 556 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Estate of Stark, , DeWitt v. Magma Copper Co., 16 Ariz.App.
Continental Casualty Co. v. Industrial Commission 547 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1976
Continental Casualty Co. v. Industrial Commission 547 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1976
P.2d 410 (1964); , , P.2d 540 (1953)
Ross v. Industrial Commission 540 P.2d 1234 Ariz. 1975
Ross v. Industrial Commission 540 P.2d 1234 Ariz. 1975
Sellinger v. Freeway Mobile Home Sales, Inc. 521 P.2d 1119 Ariz. 1974
Sellinger v. Freeway Mobile Home Sales, Inc. 521 P.2d 1119 Ariz. 1974
In re One 1965 Ford Mustang
Ruth v. Industrial Commission 483 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Ruth v. Industrial Commission 483 P.2d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Automatic Registering Machine Company, , 285 P. 1034 (1930).
Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise 469 P.2d 68 Ariz. 1970
Greyhound Parks of Arizona, Inc. v. Waitman 464 P.2d 966 Ariz. 1970
Greyhound Parks of Arizona, Inc. v. Waitman 464 P.2d 966 Ariz. 1970
Arizona Gunite Builders, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co. 459 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1969
Arizona Gunite Builders, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co. 459 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1969
While this case does lend some support to Continental’s position, in the intervening years, the statute has been subject to constant revision, a history of which is set forth in this Court’s , , and, as we there stated, “ * * the intent of the legislature if it can be ascertained is the criterion we must follow.
Rhodes v. Hirsch 429 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Rhodes v. Hirsch 429 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Lyon v. Great American Insurance Company 422 P.2d 724 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Lyon v. Great American Insurance Company 422 P.2d 724 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
The Arizona Supreme Court set forth the Legislative history of Section 32-1152, including the most recent amendment which was enacted in 1961
Continental Casualty Company v. Grabe Brick Co. 401 P.2d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Continental Casualty Company v. Grabe Brick Co. 401 P.2d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
in the following words: “It is so axiomatic as to need no citation that the object of statutory interpretation is to determine the meaning and intent of the legislature.
Employment Security Commission v. Maryland Casualty Co. 375 P.2d 269 Ariz. 1962
Employment Security Commission v. Bill Baum, General Contractor, Inc. 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
Employment Security Commission v. Hoefler 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
Employment Security Commission v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
Employment Security Commission v. Hoefler 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
because the issues involved in each case are iden *158 tical.
Employment Security Commission v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
because the issues involved in each case are identical.
Employment Security Commission v. Bill Baum, General Contractor, Inc. 375 P.2d 268 Ariz. 1962
because *159 'the issues involved in each case are identical.
Employment Security Commission v. Maryland Casualty Co. 375 P.2d 269 Ariz. 1962
because the issues involved in each case are identical.