Cited by

¶25 These arguments invoke the last-antecedent rule, which “requires that a qualifying phrase be applied to the word or phrase immediately preceding as long as there is no contrary intent indicated.” N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 24 (2004) (quoting Phoenix Control Sys., Inc. v. Ins.

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 (2004).

Second, Arizona has a strong policy interest in enforcing arbitration provisions, North Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 16 (2004); ¶ 34 (2017) (referring to “the strong public policy favoring arbitration” as Arizona’s preferred method of dispute resolution); whereas, as we will discuss in greater detail later, the state also has a strong interest in enforcing its consumer fraud statutes.

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 (2004) (citations omitted).

See N. Valley Emergency, Specialists, ¶ 9 (2004).

The family court’s error in proceeding absent a motion or the parties’ agreement was not preserved and is not before us. See N. Valley Emergency Specialists, L.L.C. 7 ¶ 6 n.2 (2004) (finding issue not raised by party in either the trial court or court of appeals waived).

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 (2004) (explaining that a statute’s language is “the best and most reliable index” of its meaning (citation omitted)).

¶12 In North Valley Emergency Specialists, the Arizona Supreme Court held that A.R.S.

See North Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 1 (2004) (holding that A.R.S.

“When interpreting a statute, we look first to the plain language because that is ‘the best and most reliable index of a statute’s meaning.’” City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., quoting N. Valley Emergency Specialists

A statute’s language is “the best and most reliable index of a statute’s meaning.” N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 , ( , ).

§ 1-214(B), “unless the legislature expresses ‘manifest intent’ to the contrary,” N. Valley Emergency Specialists, quoting Homebuilders Ass’n of Cent.

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9

§ 1 — 214(B) (2002); see also N. Valley Emergency Specialists, 1118

North Valley Emergency Specialists

258 P.3d at 183 (“If the language of those provisions is clear, [it is] the best indicator of the authors’ intent and as a matter of judicial restraint we ‘must apply it without resorting to other methods of statutory interpretation, unless application of the plain meaning would lead to impossible or absurd results.’”), quoting N. Valley Emergency Specialists, (internal citation omitted); (clear and unambiguous language of statute normally conclusive evidence of meaning unless there is express e

See N. Valley Emergency, Specialists, L.L.C., v. Santana, ¶ 9 , ¶ 5

lear, it is “the best indicator of the authors’ intent and as a matter of judicial restraint we ‘must apply it without resorting to other methods of statutory interpretation, unless application of the plain meaning would lead to impossible or absurd results.’” quoting N. Valley Emergency Specialists

ntent and as a matter of judicial restraint we „must apply it without resorting to other methods of statutory interpretation, unless 4 application of the plain meaning would lead to impossible or absurd results.‟” quoting N. Valley Emergency Specialists

If the language of those provisions is clear, they are the best indicator of the authors’ intent and as a matter of judicial restraint we “must ‘apply it without resorting to other methods of statutory interpretation,’ unless application of the plain meaning would lead to impossible or absurd results.” N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 , (citation omitted)

*259 N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9 , (citation omitted).

See N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 9, (court will not construe statutes in a manner leading to absurd results).

The word “or” generally means “[a] disjunctive particle used to express an alternative or to give a choice of one among two or more things.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1095 (6th ed. 1990); see also North Valley Emergency Specialists, L.L.C. v. Santana, 208 Ariz. 301, 306 ¶ 26, (concluding that statutory use of disjunctive “or” when “[p]lainly read” suggests alternatives among listed items).

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, ¶ 8 , (citation omitted).

N. Valley Emergency Specialists, , 303 ¶ 9