Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Cullen v. Auto-Owners Insurance, 189 P.3d 344.

372 citing documents.

Chandler v. Rancho Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Chandler v. Rancho Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Chapa v. Barker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Chapa v. Barker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co., ¶ 6, (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
Florence v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Florence v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Medrano v. Maricopa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Medrano v. Maricopa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., ¶ 7, (holding court must “assume the truth of the well- pled factual allegations and indulge all reasonable inferences therefrom”).
In Re $70,070 in U.S. Currency 335 P.3d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In Re $70,070 in U.S. Currency 335 P.3d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Co., ¶¶ 6-7, Builders Fin.
Lemad v. Miravista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Lemad v. Miravista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., ¶ 6, (citation omitted).
ML Servicing Co. v. Coles 334 P.3d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
ML Servicing Co. v. Coles 334 P.3d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Midtown v. Farmers 334 P.3d 1252 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Midtown v. Farmers 334 P.3d 1252 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., ¶ 7, (noting that conclusory statements insufficiently state a claim upon which relief may be granted).
Hannosh v. Segal 328 P.3d 1049 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Hannosh v. Segal 328 P.3d 1049 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Beaver v. American Family Mutual Insurance 324 P.3d 870 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Beaver v. American Family Mutual Insurance 324 P.3d 870 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., P.3d 344 (2008); Duran v. Hartford Ins.
Terterova v. byous/nestor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Terterova v. byous/nestor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Southwest Non-Profit Housing Corporation v. Nowak, Kniffen, Martell 322 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Southwest Non-Profit Housing Corporation v. Nowak, Kniffen, Martell 322 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Jimenez v. state/ades Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Jimenez v. state/ades Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Callies v. United Heritage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Callies v. United Heritage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Steinberger v. McVey 318 P.3d 419 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Steinberger v. McVey 318 P.3d 419 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Stout v. Taylor 311 P.3d 1088 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Stout v. Taylor 311 P.3d 1088 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Co., ¶ 10 , (explaining that only the supreme court may change the meaning of rales); , (confirming that former statewide rale in effect at the time requiring a court reporter at all preliminary hearings took priority over local
Rogers v. Board of Regents of the University of Arizona 311 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Rogers v. Board of Regents of the University of Arizona 311 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
TP Racing, L.L.L.P. v. Simms 307 P.3d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
TP Racing, L.L.L.P. v. Simms 307 P.3d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Co., ¶ 7 , the allegations could provide grounds for TP Racing’s dissolution only.
Belen Loan Investors, LLC v. Myers, Baumgardner, Los Luna Highlands 296 P.3d 984 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Belen Loan Investors, LLC v. Myers, Baumgardner, Los Luna Highlands 296 P.3d 984 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Co., P.3d 344 (2008) (Cullen II).
Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp. 290 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Sullivan v. Pulte Home Corp. 290 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co., ¶ 7 , (citations omitted).
Lerner v. DMB Realty, LLC 294 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Lerner v. DMB Realty, LLC 294 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Young v. Rose 286 P.3d 518 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Young v. Rose 286 P.3d 518 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co., ¶ 7 , (citations omitted).
Coleman v. City of Mesa 284 P.3d 863 Ariz. 2012
Coleman v. City of Mesa 284 P.3d 863 Ariz. 2012
John Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank Ariz. 2012
John Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank Ariz. 2012
Co., ¶ 7, we will affirm a dismissal when “the plaintiff should be denied relief as a matter of law - 7 - given the facts alleged,” Logan v. Forever Living Products Int’l, Inc., ¶ 7