Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Albano v. SHEA HOMES LTD. PARTNERSHIP, 254 P.3d 360.

26 citing documents.

Matthew Abraham ph.D. v. Arizona Board of Regents Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Matthew Abraham ph.D. v. Arizona Board of Regents Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
¶25 A limitations period generally begins running “after an injury occurs and is (or reasonably should have been) discovered.” Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship
State of Arizona v. Az Board of Regents Ariz. 2022
State of Arizona v. Az Board of Regents Ariz. 2022
(quoting Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 23 (2011)).
Thomas Cox v. Hon. ponce/makayla Esplin 491 P.3d 1109 Ariz. 2021
Thomas Cox v. Hon. ponce/makayla Esplin 491 P.3d 1109 Ariz. 2021
¶¶ 23–24 (2011), this Court explained: [Statutes of limitations] generally begin to run after an injury occurs and is (or reasonably should have been) discovered.
State v. Abor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Abor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
“[S]tatutes of repose differ in purpose and operation from statutes of limitations.” Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 23 (2011).
Rep Custom v. McBride Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rep Custom v. McBride Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
See Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶¶ 23–24 6 REP CUSTOM v. MCBRIDE Decision of the Court (2011).
City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. 393 P.3d 919 Ariz. 2017
City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. 393 P.3d 919 Ariz. 2017
Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 19, 127 ¶ 26, 366 (2011).
Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Whether Ader’s claims against Felger are time-barred is a legal question, see Montano, 48 P.3d at 496, the answer to which resolves her rights in this matter, cf. Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, (“[A] statute of repose defines a substantive right.”).
City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. 375 P.3d 1189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. 375 P.3d 1189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
But see Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 23 (2011) (“In Arizona’s legislative scheme, statutes of repose differ in purpose and operation from statutes of limitations.”).
Rader v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP 352 P.3d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Rader v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP 352 P.3d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶16 The third Arizona appellate court decision considering American Pipe tolling is Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, P.3d 360 (2011).
Grady v. Barth 312 P.3d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Grady v. Barth 312 P.3d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Hinton, 65 Ariz. at 116 , 174 P.2d at 753-54 (1946) (procedural provisions of FED statutes not superseded by rules of civil procedure); see also Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 26 , (“We have repeatedly recognized that when a constitutionally enacted substantive statute conflicts with a procedural rule, the statute prevails.”).
Vicki Pounders v. Enserch E&C Inc 306 P.3d 9 Ariz. 2013
Vicki Pounders v. Enserch E&C Inc 306 P.3d 9 Ariz. 2013
Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 24
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
¶ 20 A statute of repose “defines a substantive right.” Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 24 , ( , ).
Pounders v. ENSERCH E & C, INC. 276 P.3d 502 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Pounders v. ENSERCH E & C, INC. 276 P.3d 502 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 24 , (noting statutes of repose define substantive rights); see also Rice v. Dow Chem.