Cited by

Dist., ¶ 6 (2007) (issue preclusion).

Dist., ¶ 6 (2007)); accord Crosby-Garbotz v. Fell ex rel.

Dist., ¶ 6 (2007) (issue preclusion); (claim preclusion).

Dist., ¶ 6 5 BANNER MEDICAL V. HON.

Dist., ¶ 9 (2007) (“An appellate court must determine whether the judgment, not the reasoning, of the superior court was correct.” (citation omitted)).

Dist., ¶ 9 (2007) (“An appellate court must determine whether the judgment, not the reasoning, of the superior court was correct.” (citing Gary Outdoor Advert.

AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AA 5 Because we may affirm if a dismissal was correct for any reason, ¶ 9 (2007), we do not address Plaintiffs’ argument that Defendants failed to show they were prejudiced by delay, see Cooper, 6 Ariz. App. at 469 (dismissal for failure to prosecute is proper only if plaintiff has abandoned his case or caused delay which prejudiced defendant).

Dist., ¶ 9 (2007), and will affirm a judgment if the trial court was correct in its ruling for any reason, ¶ 1 (App. 2016).

Dist., ¶ 9, (citation omitted).

Dist., , (“An appellate court must determine whether the judgment, not the reasoning, of the superior court was correct.”).

Dist., (“An appellate court must determine whether the judgment, not the reasoning, of the superior court was correct.”).