Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Planning Group of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Properties, Ltd., 246 P.3d 343.

71 citing documents.

AZ HOLBROOK v. VAN HO Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
Props., Ltd., ¶ 16 (2011), which are analyzed in their totality, id.
Danko v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Danko v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Props., Ltd., ¶ 16 (2011).
Danko v. Gorski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Danko v. Gorski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
Danko v. Alley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Danko v. Alley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
Brownco v. Schilk Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Brownco v. Schilk Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Prop’s., Ltd., -68, ¶¶ 18-25 (2011) (rejecting the distinction between the “purposeful availment” test and the “purposeful direction” test).
Danko v. Grantland Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
High Stakes v. Garver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
High Stakes v. Garver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011) (citing Ariz. R. Civ.
Danko v. Ameika Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Brownsberger v. Lange/prism Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Danko v. Ameika Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
Brownsberger v. Lange/prism Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011); see also Ariz. R. Civ.
Danko v. Whiting Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Danko v. Whiting Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
McCormick v. the Multistate Lottery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
McCormick v. the Multistate Lottery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Props., Ltd., -68, ¶¶ 18-25 (2011) (The court rejected the distinction between the two tests as applied to contract or tort claims and focused the specific-jurisdiction inquiry on “purposeful conduct” directed toward the state.).
Lizbeth Martinez Martinez v. Nancy Zuniga 547 P.3d 371 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
Lizbeth Martinez Martinez v. Nancy Zuniga 547 P.3d 371 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
Danko v. Wainscott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Danko v. Wainscott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 2 n.1 (2011).
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011).
Gerdes v. the Chevy Store Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Gerdes v. the Chevy Store Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Props., Ltd., ¶ 13 (2011) (internal citations omitted).
Prince v. Prince Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
First, the Arizona Supreme Court ordered that opinion “shall not be published.”
Woods v. McCarty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Woods v. McCarty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011); accord Ariz. R. Civ.
Charles v. Carnegie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Charles v. Carnegie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011).
Arab v. Sarkis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Arab v. Sarkis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
While a state may exercise jurisdiction over its own citizens without constraint, the “Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits the exercise of personal jurisdiction by state courts over non-resident defendants.” Planning Group of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 14 (2011) (citing Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 723–24 (1877)).
Malcomson v. Imvu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Malcomson v. Imvu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011).
Singer v. Mondex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Singer v. Mondex Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011).
Busby v. Hon goldstein/busby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Busby v. Hon goldstein/busby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 11 (2011).
Conklin Et Ux v. Medtronic Inc 431 P.3d 571 Ariz. 2018
Conklin Et Ux v. Medtronic Inc 431 P.3d 571 Ariz. 2018
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., ¶ 22 (2011) (noting that Ninth Circuit decisions “are not binding on this Court”).
Jones v. Denning Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jones v. Denning Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Properties, Ltd., - 69, ¶¶ 26-31 (2011), "the requisite minimum contacts are not established when the plaintiff's action 'requires the defendant to send communications into th[e] forum[,]'" Batton v. Tenn.
Picus v. Kushner Carlson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Picus v. Kushner Carlson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
of Scottsdale, LLC v. Lake Mathews Mineral Properties, Ltd., ¶ 12 (2011).
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Lemaire 395 P.3d 1116 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., n.1, ¶ 2 (2011).
In re Marriage of Peck 395 P.3d 734 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
In re Marriage of Peck 395 P.3d 734 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd.