Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Tovrea Land and Cattle Company v. Linsenmeyer, 412 P.2d 47.

232 citing documents.

Lederman v. Phelps Dodge Corporation 505 P.2d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
Lederman v. Phelps Dodge Corporation 505 P.2d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
Hoeffel v. Campbell 494 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Hoeffel v. Campbell 494 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Packer v. Donaldson 492 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Packer v. Donaldson 492 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
The test in Arizona to determine whether a director breached his fiduciary duty to a
Roche v. Golden Sky Lands, Inc. 487 P.2d 756 Ariz. 1971
Roche v. Golden Sky Lands, Inc. 487 P.2d 756 Ariz. 1971
Meadows v. Grant 486 P.2d 216 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Meadows v. Grant 486 P.2d 216 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
State Tax Commission v. Marcus J. Lawrence Memorial Hospital 485 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
State Tax Commission v. Marcus J. Lawrence Memorial Hospital 485 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Guirey, Srnka and Arnold, Architects v. City of Phoenix, 9 Ariz.App.
Watzek v. Walker 485 P.2d 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Watzek v. Walker 485 P.2d 3 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Guirey, Srnka & Arnold, Architects v. City of Phoenix, 9 Ariz.App.
Conner v. Brkich 481 P.2d 894 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Conner v. Brkich 481 P.2d 894 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Solove v. Solove 469 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Solove v. Solove 469 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Cf. Tovrea Land & , Lashinsky v. Hoffman, 3 Ariz.App.
Kadish v. PHX.-SCOTTS. SPORTS COMPANY 466 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Kadish v. PHX.-SCOTTS. SPORTS COMPANY 466 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
3 W. Fletcher, Private Corporations Sec.
Ong Hing v. Arizona Harness Raceway, Inc. 459 P.2d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Ong Hing v. Arizona Harness Raceway, Inc. 459 P.2d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
where the Court in a lengthy opinion reviewed the law applicable to a director dealing with his company, his interest being adverse thereto, and held that such transactions will be closely scrutinized, but will be set aside only if they are unfair to the corporation.
Costanzo v. Stewart 453 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Costanzo v. Stewart 453 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
City of Phoenix v. Burke 452 P.2d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Followed City of Phoenix v. Burke 452 P.2d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
In re Estate of Daley, 6 Ariz.App.
Guirey, Srnka & Arnold, Architects v. City of Phoenix 449 P.2d 306 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Guirey, Srnka & Arnold, Architects v. City of Phoenix 449 P.2d 306 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Bowen v. Watz 428 P.2d 694 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Bowen v. Watz 428 P.2d 694 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
ty is repaid his loan and Third Party has been reimbursed for its expenses as hereinabove provided for in paragraph 3(e).” Since all parties have agreed that the memorandum reflects accurately the intentions of the participants, and since we are not bound by the findings of the trial court on questions of law or mixed ques *522 tions of law and fact, , we are free to make our own interpretation of the agreement.
Tovrea v. Superior Court 419 P.2d 79 Ariz. 1966
Followed Tovrea v. Superior Court 419 P.2d 79 Ariz. 1966