Cited by

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

372 citing documents.

Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A. 277 P.3d 781 Ariz. 2012
Hogan v. Washington Mutual Bank, N.A. 277 P.3d 781 Ariz. 2012
Co., , 419 ¶ 7, we will affirm a dismissal when “the plaintiff should be denied relief as a matter of law given the facts alleged,” Logan v. Forever Living Products Int’l, Inc., , 193 ¶ 7
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway 246 P.3d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Co., ¶ 7 , ("complaint that states only legal conclusions, without any supporting factual allegations, does not satisfy Arizona's notice pleading standard"); ¶ 14 , (supplemental opinion).
Grand v. Nacchio 236 P.3d 398 Ariz. 2010
Grand v. Nacchio 236 P.3d 398 Ariz. 2010
Lips v. SCOTTSDALE HEALTHCARE CORP. 229 P.3d 1008 Ariz. 2010
Lips v. SCOTTSDALE HEALTHCARE CORP. 229 P.3d 1008 Ariz. 2010
Co., 218 Ariz. 417, 419-20 ¶¶ 7, 14, -47 (2008) (“[C]ourts are limited to considering the well-pled facts and .
Flagstaff Affordable Housing Ltd. Partnership v. Design Alliance, Inc. 223 P.3d 664 Ariz. 2010
Flagstaff Affordable Housing Ltd. Partnership v. Design Alliance, Inc. 223 P.3d 664 Ariz. 2010
Grand v. Nacchio 217 P.3d 1203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
GRAND v. NACCHIO McMASTER QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Grand v. Nacchio 217 P.3d 1203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
GRAND v. NACCHIO McMASTER QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
VICARI v. Lake Havasu City 213 P.3d 367 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
VICARI v. Lake Havasu City 213 P.3d 367 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Co., , (stating inclusion of matters outside the pleading in motion to dismiss alone not sufficient to convert motion to one for summary judgment as court has discretion under Rule 12(b) to disregard those matters); ¶ 8 , (App.2002
Chavez v. Brewer 214 P.3d 397 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Chavez v. Brewer 214 P.3d 397 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Co., ¶ 7 , (stating that courts “must [ ] assume the truth of the wellpled factual allegations and indulge all reasonable inferences therefrom” when adjudicating a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss).
Kline v. Kline 212 P.3d 902 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Kline v. Kline 212 P.3d 902 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Valerie M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 198 P.3d 1203 Ariz. 2009
Valerie M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 198 P.3d 1203 Ariz. 2009
Co., , 420 ¶10, our adoption of a rule is not an adjudication of its validity.