Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite New PCR Intl. v. ICA, 107 P.3d 923.

92 citing documents.

Andres M., Robert M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sec., –82, ¶ 13 (App. 2005); In re Maricopa Cty.
Traci E. v. Dcs, A.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Kayoma S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sec., ¶ 13 (App. 2005), and Jennifer B. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Jessica C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sec., ¶ 19, (internal quotation and citation omitted)).
Marianne N. v. Department of Child Safety 381 P.3d 264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2005)).
Ashlee C. v. Dcs, A.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2005)) (internal quotations omitted).
Forrest C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., -82, ¶¶ 12-13 (App. 2005) (citations omitted).
Shiloh Z. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2005)).
Kelly M. v. Karen K., Peter K., B.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2005) ().
Stacey M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., -82, ¶ 13, -28 (App. 2005) (“we look only to determine whether there was substantial evidence to sustain” the juvenile court’s findings, and “we 2In its answering brief, DCS admitted the juvenile court should have allowed Stacey to testify about the children’s best interests, but a
Summer P. v. Shirley M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
James M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., -82, ¶ 13 (App. 2005) (citations omitted).
Jesus S. v. Dcs, B.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Victor H. v. Dcs, N.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19, (citation omitted).
State v. Krznarich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2005) ().
Justin C. v. Dcs, S.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Kimberlee K. v. Dcs, I.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Teresa F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., -83, ¶ 19 (App. 2005)).
Enrico G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., -82, ¶ 13, -28 (App. 2005).
Catherine B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., ¶ 19, (citation omitted).
Bethany C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., –83 ¶ 19, –29 (App. 2005).
Angela B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sherri C. v. Dcs, H.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., -83, ¶ 19 (App. 2005) ().
Guy N. v. Dcs, B.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., –83, ¶ 19, –30 (App. 2005).
Brian H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Eddie B. v. Dcs, E.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Krieger v. Duick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., -83, ¶ 19, -29 (App. 2005).
Diana R. v. Dcs, I.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Desiree S. v. Department of Child Safety 334 P.3d 222 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Sec., ¶ 13, ( ¶ 12, (stating that substantial evidence is any relevant evidence that allows a reasonable person to reach the same conclusion as the fact-finder)).
Covino v. Forrest Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Raegina M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Amanda S. v. Ades, R.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Sec., -83, ¶ 19, -29 (App. 2005).
Taylor-Bertling v. Foley 313 P.3d 537 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Sec., , , 926 (App.2005).
Bennigno R. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 312 P.3d 861 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Yvonne L. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 258 P.3d 233 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Sec., ¶ 13 , , 927 (App.2005).
Jordan C. , Jesse C., Kailynn C., Michele C. v. Ades Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Jordan C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 219 P.3d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Sec., , , 927 (App.2005).
Kimu P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 178 P.3d 511 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Sec., -83, ¶ 19 , , 928-29 (App.2005) (citations omitted).
Lawrence R. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 177 P.3d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
The test to determine whether the instructions are accurate is “whether the instructions, viewed in their entirety, adequately set forth the law applicable to the case.” ¶ 8 , , 927 (App.2005) (citation omitted).
Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 173 P.3d 479 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Vanessa H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 159 P.3d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Sec., , 82, ¶ 16, , 928 (App. 2005) (“conflicts in the evidence are for the fact-finder to resolve”); Jesus M., 203 Ariz. at 282, ¶ 12 , 53 P.3d at 207 (“The resolution of such conflicts in the evidence is uniquely the province of the juvenile court as the trier of fact; we do not re-weigh the evidence on revie
Adrian E. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 158 P.3d 225 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007