Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Kelch v. Courson, 447 P.2d 550.

38 citing documents.

Williams v. Thude 934 P.2d 1349 Ariz. 1997
Williams v. Thude 934 P.2d 1349 Ariz. 1997
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. 861 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. 861 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
Trojanovich v. Marshall, supra; Krek v. Briel, 3 Ariz.App.
Copeland v. City of Yuma 772 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Distinguished Copeland v. City of Yuma 772 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
The City acknowledges this general proposition, , , to assert that an erroneous contributory negligence instruction constitutes fundamental error and is reviewable upon appeal.
Liberatore v. Thompson 760 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Liberatore v. Thompson 760 P.2d 612 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Ahmed v. Collins, 23 Ariz.App.
Bell v. State 693 P.2d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Bell v. State 693 P.2d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
“[T]he subject matter of contributory negligence is so important that a failure to treat it properly in a court’s instructions is fundamental error.”
Rimondi v. Briggs 606 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1980
Rimondi v. Briggs 606 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1980
Manner v. Raskin 545 P.2d 927 Ariz. 1976
Manner v. Raskin 545 P.2d 927 Ariz. 1976
W. R. Skousen Contractors, Inc. v. Chatter 536 P.2d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
W. R. Skousen Contractors, Inc. v. Chatter 536 P.2d 722 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
State v. Mendiola 532 P.2d 193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
State v. Mendiola 532 P.2d 193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Ruiz v. Faulkner, 12 Ariz.App.
Forquer v. Pinal County 526 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
Forquer v. Pinal County 526 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
Brierley v. Anaconda Company 522 P.2d 1085 Ariz. 1974
Brierley v. Anaconda Company 522 P.2d 1085 Ariz. 1974
Apigian v. Mills 512 P.2d 596 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Apigian v. Mills 512 P.2d 596 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
P.2d 550 (1968); , Ruiz v. Faulkner, 12 Ariz.App.
Hunter Contracting Co. v. Sanner Contracting Co. 492 P.2d 735 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Hunter Contracting Co. v. Sanner Contracting Co. 492 P.2d 735 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
State v. Sayre 483 P.2d 803 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
State v. Sayre 483 P.2d 803 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Ruiz v. Faulkner, 12 Ariz.App.
Sulpher Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Beltran 478 P.2d 128 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Sulpher Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Beltran 478 P.2d 128 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
In such circumstances it is immaterial whether the conduct of the defendant, was more negligent than that of the plaintiffs’ decedents.’ ” (Emphasis added) In the case of Heimke v. Munoz, supra, the court stated: “We note a tendency, , , , , to instruct the jury that if it finds contributory negligence ‘the law would leave them (the parties) where it finds them.’ Such an instruction is expressly disapproved.
State v. Gregge 475 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State v. Gregge 475 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Heimke v. Munoz 470 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1970
Heimke v. Munoz 470 P.2d 107 Ariz. 1970
We note a tendency, , , , , to instruct the jury that if it finds contributory negligence “the law would leave them (the parties) where it finds them.” Such an instruction is expressly disapproved.
Heimke v. Munoz 462 P.2d 819 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Heimke v. Munoz 462 P.2d 819 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Malinski v. Pember 453 P.2d 540 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Malinski v. Pember 453 P.2d 540 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969