Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise, 469 P.2d 68.

33 citing documents.

In Re Estate of Winn 237 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In Re Estate of Winn 237 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Co.), -86 , -71 (1970), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Hurt v. Superior Court (Bookbinder), , )).
Barnes v. Outlaw 964 P.2d 484 Ariz. 1998
Barnes v. Outlaw 964 P.2d 484 Ariz. 1998
Almost twenty years later, however, we overruled that part of Jeune , stating “[w]hen we find that the common law or ‘judge-made law’ is unjust or out of step with the times, we have no reluctance to change it.” , ( , ).
Diaz v. Magma Copper Co. 950 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Diaz v. Magma Copper Co. 950 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
HOWARD FRANK, MD, PC v. Superior Court 722 P.2d 955 Ariz. 1986
Reben v. Ely 705 P.2d 1360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Reben v. Ely 705 P.2d 1360 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
the Bradshaw court observed, “ ‘When we find that the common law or “judge-made law” is unjust or out of step with the times, we have no reluctance to change it.’ ” 108 Ariz. at 584 , 503 P.2d at 805 .
Gibson v. Boyle 679 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Gibson v. Boyle 679 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise
Bowslaugh v. Bowslaugh 617 P.2d 25 Ariz. 1979
Bowslaugh v. Bowslaugh 617 P.2d 25 Ariz. 1979
Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise
Hurt v. SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF ARIZ. 601 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1979
Hurt v. SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF ARIZ. 601 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1979
Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise
State v. SUPERIOR CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF PIMA 585 P.2d 882 Ariz. 1978
State v. SUPERIOR CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF PIMA 585 P.2d 882 Ariz. 1978
Watts v. State 566 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Padilla v. Industrial Commission 535 P.2d 634 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Lombardo v. Pollock 521 P.2d 636 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
Lombardo v. Pollock 521 P.2d 636 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
We find nothing in Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise, , which mandates a contrary holding.
Huebner v. Deuchle 514 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1973
Huebner v. Deuchle 514 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1973
of the next succeeding section, A.R.S.
Gomez v. Leverton 509 P.2d 735 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
Gomez v. Leverton 509 P.2d 735 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
See, Lueck v. Superior Court, *607 County of Cochise
City of Glendale v. Bradshaw 503 P.2d 803 Ariz. 1972
City of Glendale v. Bradshaw 503 P.2d 803 Ariz. 1972
“When we find that the common law or ‘judge-made law’ is unjust or out of step with the times, we have no reluctance to change it.”
Huebner v. Deuchle 501 P.2d 417 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Huebner v. Deuchle 501 P.2d 417 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
§ 12-612; Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise
Walthers v. Kroll 492 P.2d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Walthers v. Kroll 492 P.2d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Our Supreme Court has passed upon the legal question involved in Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise, , when it stated: “We hold that the parents of the deceased have no right to recover for his wrongful death because there are also surviving a wife and children.
Solomon v. Harman 489 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1971
Solomon v. Harman 489 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1971
* * Lueck v. Superior Court, County of Cochise