Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite City of Mesa v. Killingsworth, 394 P.2d 410.

193 citing documents.

Circle K Stores, Inc. v. Apache County 18 P.3d 713 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Circle K Stores, Inc. v. Apache County 18 P.3d 713 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
(“An amendment which, in effect, construes and clarifies a prior statute will be accepted as the legislative declaration of the original act.”).
In Re Victoria K. 11 P.3d 1066 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In Re Victoria K. 11 P.3d 1066 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Davis v. Arizona Department of Revenue 4 P.3d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Davis v. Arizona Department of Revenue 4 P.3d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Although this Court is not bound by an agency’s interpretation of a statute that it enforces, absent contrary legislative intent, we generally afford an agency’s construction “great weight.”
Bills v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 984 P.2d 574 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Bills v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 984 P.2d 574 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Although a statutory amendment made shortly after the original enactment sometimes may clarify ambiguities in the earlier version, , , we do not believe that canon of statutory construction realistically applies here, when a new generation of legislators amended the statute twenty-one years after its original passage.
San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Superior Court 972 P.2d 179 Ariz. 1999
San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Superior Court 972 P.2d 179 Ariz. 1999
See, , (amendment enacted one year after original version of statute was clarification rather than change); , (amendment enacted one year after statute was used for clarification).
Inzunza-Ortega v. Superior Court 968 P.2d 631 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Inzunza-Ortega v. Superior Court 968 P.2d 631 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
City of Tucson v. State 957 P.2d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
City of Tucson v. State 957 P.2d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
State v. Nihiser 953 P.2d 1252 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
State v. Nihiser 953 P.2d 1252 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
(courts presume the legislature did not intend to do a futile thing by including a provision that is not operative).
Cutter Aviation, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue 958 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Cutter Aviation, Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue 958 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
v. Warren, , -95 , Fund Manager v. Tucson Police & Fire Pub.
Tallent v. National General Insurance 915 P.2d 665 Ariz. 1996
Tallent v. National General Insurance 915 P.2d 665 Ariz. 1996
Weekly v. City of Mesa 888 P.2d 1346 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Weekly v. City of Mesa 888 P.2d 1346 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
E.C. Garcia & Co. v. Arizona State Department of Revenue 875 P.2d 169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Turner 855 P.2d 442 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Turner 855 P.2d 442 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
(“while administrative interpretation is not binding where long continued and in cases of ambiguity we will acquiesce therein”); , (“although the administrative interpretation is not binding upon us, in cases of serious doubt we wil
Saunders v. Board of Pardons & Paroles 847 P.2d 1124 Ariz. 1993
Rotter v. Coconino County 818 P.2d 704 Ariz. 1991
Rotter v. Coconino County 818 P.2d 704 Ariz. 1991
Libra Group, Inc. v. State 805 P.2d 409 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Libra Group, Inc. v. State 805 P.2d 409 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Rose v. Arizona Department of Corrections 804 P.2d 845 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Rose v. Arizona Department of Corrections 804 P.2d 845 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Alhambra School District v. Superior Court 780 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Perez v. Maricopa County 760 P.2d 1089 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Perez v. Maricopa County 760 P.2d 1089 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
We conclude that that amendment was a construction and clarification of the prior statute to “be accepted as the legislative declaration of the original act.”
Sahf v. Lake Havasu City Ass'n for the Retarded & Handicapped 721 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Sahf v. Lake Havasu City Ass'n for the Retarded & Handicapped 721 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Morris v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n., 24 Ariz.App.
Fund Manager, Public Safety Personnel Retirement System v. Arizona Department of Administration 725 P.2d 1127 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Fund Manager, Public Safety Personnel Retirement System v. Arizona Department of Administration 725 P.2d 1127 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Fund Manager v. TUCSON POLICE & FIRE 708 P.2d 92 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Fund Manager v. TUCSON POLICE & FIRE 708 P.2d 92 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Sweet 693 P.2d 921 Ariz. 1985
State v. Sweet 693 P.2d 921 Ariz. 1985
It is equally clear, however, that “[a]n amendment which, in effect, construes and clarifies a prior statute will be accepted as the legislative declaration of the original act.”
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
Evenchik v. State Farm Insurance 679 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
EVENCHIC v. State Farm Ins. Co. 679 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
EVENCHIC v. State Farm Ins. Co. 679 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Evenchik v. State Farm Insurance 679 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
B & P Concrete, , P.2d 892 (1965)
State v. Wise 671 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1983