Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Application of Levine, 397 P.2d 205.

42 citing documents.

Starr v. Az Bof Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Starr v. Az Bof Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Our supreme court has repeatedly held “one may not be excluded by state action from a business, profession or occupation in a manner or for reasons which contravene the due process clause of the [Fourteenth Amendment].” Application of Levine
Grand Holdings v. Peoria Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Grand Holdings v. Peoria Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶20 Similarly, Appellants’ reliance on Application of Levine, is misplaced.
Blaser v. Kaiser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Blaser v. Kaiser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
of Dental Exam’rs, -07, ¶ 20 (App. 1999), and -92 (1964)).
Chereka v. Gadissa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Chereka v. Gadissa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
at ¶ 16 (citing Application of Levine, – 92, ).
Curtis v. Richardson 131 P.3d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Curtis v. Richardson 131 P.3d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Application of Levine, -92
In Re Hamm 123 P.3d 652 Ariz. 2005
In Re Hamm 123 P.3d 652 Ariz. 2005
Webb v. State Ex Rel. Arizona Bd. of Medical Examiners 48 P.3d 505 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Webb v. State Ex Rel. Arizona Bd. of Medical Examiners 48 P.3d 505 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
See App. of Levine, , (a deprivation hearing, to satisfy due process, must include among other elements notice, a reasonably definite statement of charges, and the right to produce witnesses and examine adverse witnesses); see also Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 *559 U.S. 254, 268, 90 S.Ct.
Dahnad v. Buttrick 36 P.3d 742 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Dahnad v. Buttrick 36 P.3d 742 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
But, “[f]or those who are qualified, the practice of a profession is a right, not just a privilege,” and “[b]efore the State can curtail that right, it must afford due process of law.” , (citing Application of Levine, -91 , -07 (1964)).
Hansson v. Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners 985 P.2d 551 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Hansson v. Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners 985 P.2d 551 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
( , ); see also Application of Levine, , (state may not preclude right to engage in profession for reasons which violate due process); , (citation omitted) (state regulation of right to pursue a profession must comply with due process).
Schillerstrom v. State 885 P.2d 156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Schillerstrom v. State 885 P.2d 156 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Application of Levine, -91 , -07 (1964).
In re Macartney 786 P.2d 967 Ariz. 1990
In re Macartney 786 P.2d 967 Ariz. 1990
Matter of Ronwin 680 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1983
Matter of Ronwin 680 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1983
Ronwin I, 113 Ariz. at 358 , 555 P.2d at 316 ; Application of Levine, , Rule 28(c)(XII)(F)(2).
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JD-561 638 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1981
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JD-561 638 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1981
431 (1913); Application of Levine, , , Forman v. Creighton School District No. 14
Matter of Swartz 630 P.2d 1020 Ariz. 1981
Matter of Swartz 630 P.2d 1020 Ariz. 1981
This includes a reasonably definite statement of those charges, , which we believe was provided by the allegations in Count II.
Application of Greenberg 614 P.2d 832 Ariz. 1980
Application of Greenberg 614 P.2d 832 Ariz. 1980
Application of Ronwin 555 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1976
Application of Ronwin 555 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1976
This right “is neither greater nor less than the right to engage in other occupations, businesses or trades, for the right to seek and retain employment is shared by all equally and to be equal must be upon the same conditions.” Application of Levine, P.2d 205 (1964).
Application of Walker 539 P.2d 891 Ariz. 1975
Application of Walker 539 P.2d 891 Ariz. 1975
The failure to certify Walker as qualified to practice law is predicated upon the decision in Application of Levine, , where this Court held that if there is doubt as to whether an applicant has established his good moral character, it is the duty of the Committee to refuse certification.
Application of Klahr 433 P.2d 977 Ariz. 1967
Application of Klahr 433 P.2d 977 Ariz. 1967
Application of Levine, , ; Application of Burke
Hackin v. State 427 P.2d 910 Ariz. 1967
Hackin v. State 427 P.2d 910 Ariz. 1967
Application of Levine, , .
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
Southern Pacific Co. v. ARIZONA CORPORATION COM'N 404 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1965
Southern Pacific Co. v. ARIZONA CORPORATION COM'N 404 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1965
See Application of Levine, , , and cases cited.