Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Griffis v. Pinal County, 156 P.3d 418.

49 citing documents.

Abraham v. Arizona Board of Regents Ariz. 2026
HUDSON v. HEAP Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
GOLDWATER v. PHOENIX Ariz. 2026
Accordingly, when a document qualifies as a public record, Arizona’s “public records law creates a strong presumption in favor of disclosure.” ¶ 12 (2007).
Goldwater v. City of Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Goldwater v. City of Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
¶14 The parties do not dispute the documents Goldwater requested are “public records.” ¶ 9 (2007) (providing “three alternative definitions of public records,” a term not defined by statute).
Sierra Club v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Sierra Club v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
¶29 “Arizona law defines ‘public records’ broadly and creates a presumption requiring the disclosure of public documents.”
Potter v. Arizona House Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Potter v. Arizona House Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Lunney, 244 Ariz. at 178, ¶ 27; ¶ 11 (2007).
Silverman v. Ahcccs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Silverman v. Ahcccs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Ball v. Adhs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Ball v. Adhs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Fann v. Hon. kemp/american Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Fann v. Hon. kemp/american Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
“Arizona law defines ‘public records’ broadly and creates a presumption requiring the disclosure of public documents.” ¶ 8 (2007).
Conroy v. hutchinson/state Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Conroy v. hutchinson/state Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶14 Where the facts of a case “raise a substantial question as to the threshold determination of whether the document is subject to the statute, the court must first determine whether that document is a public record.” ¶ 13 (2007) (internal quotation omitted).
Johnson v. Queen creek/acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Johnson v. Queen creek/acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lunney v. State 418 P.3d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lunney v. State 418 P.3d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 7 (2007); Cox Arizona Publ’ns
Woodward v. Az Corp. Comm. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Woodward v. Az Corp. Comm. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
American Civil Liberties Union v. Arizona Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
American Civil Liberties Union v. Arizona Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 7 , (whether document is a public record under Arizona’s public records law presents a question of law subject to de novo review).
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
McKee v. Peoria Unified School District 338 P.3d 994 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
McKee v. Peoria Unified School District 338 P.3d 994 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
law or not.” ¶ 9, (quoting Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Cmty.
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. City of Phoenix 267 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. City of Phoenix 267 P.3d 1185 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
The court must initially determine whether the requested document is a “public record.” ¶ 13
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY SCH. DIST. v. Warren 251 P.3d 395 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State v. Young 224 P.3d 944 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
State v. Young 224 P.3d 944 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
¶ 23 There are two types of records that may be in the State’s custody: “public records” and records “of a purely private or personal nature.” ¶ 10
Schoeneweis v. Hamner 221 P.3d 48 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Schoeneweis v. Hamner 221 P.3d 48 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Lake v. City of Phoenix 218 P.3d 1004 Ariz. 2009
Lake v. City of Phoenix 218 P.3d 1004 Ariz. 2009
¶ 7 Arizona’s public records law serves to “open 5 government activity to public scrutiny.” ¶ 11, see also Phoenix Newspapers, ¶ 33, (“The core purpose of the public records law is to allow the public access to official records and other government information so that the public m
Arpaio v. Davis 210 P.3d 1287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Arpaio v. Davis 210 P.3d 1287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
¶ 10 , (citing Salt River, 168 Ariz. at 541 , 815 P.2d at 910 ).
Lake v. City of Phoenix 207 P.3d 725 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Lake v. City of Phoenix 207 P.3d 725 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Phoenix New Times, L.L.C. v. Arpaio 177 P.3d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Phoenix New Times, L.L.C. v. Arpaio 177 P.3d 275 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
§ 39-121.01(D)(1) (emphasis added); ¶ 13 , (holding that “[i]f a document falls within the scope of the public records statute, then the presumption favoring disclosure applies”).
West Valley View, Inc. v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office 165 P.3d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
West Valley View, Inc. v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office 165 P.3d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
¶ 8 , , 421 *228 (2007) (“Arizona law defines ‘public records’ broadly and creates a presumption requiring the disclosure of public documents.”); In re Corwin, Solomon & Tanenbaum v. New York State Div. of Lottery, 239 A.D.2d 763 , 657 N.Y.S.2d 803, 804-05 (N.Y.App.Div.1997) (previously disseminat
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Ellis 159 P.3d 578 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Ellis 159 P.3d 578 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
DISCUSSION ¶ 13 “Whether a document is a public record under Arizona’s public records law presents a question of law, which we review de novo.” ¶ 7

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by