Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Coleman v. City of Mesa, 284 P.3d 863.
- BNSF Railway Co. v. Seats Inc. 349 P.3d 1096 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- BNSF Railway Co. v. Seats Inc. 349 P.3d 1096 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- D'Ambrosio v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Az Eufora v. Constantine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Az Eufora v. Constantine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Casady v. Parker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Casady v. Parker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Hendershott v. Babeu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Hendershott v. Babeu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Demaree v. Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Demaree v. Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Glava v. Jpmorgan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Thieme v. Adot Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
Glava v. Jpmorgan
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
DISCUSSION ¶8 We review a decision granting a motion to dismiss de novo.3 ¶ 7
- Thieme v. Adot Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Collins v. Valley Metro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Collins v. Valley Metro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Chandler v. Rancho Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
Chandler v. Rancho
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 7, 4 In reviewing Chandler’s amended complaint to determine if it states a claim for relief that can be granted, we will assume the truth of all well-pled factual allegations and all reasonable inferences that can be determined from those facts.
- Hope v. Renaud Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Hope v. Renaud Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Chapa v. Barker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Chapa v. Barker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Florence v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Kamela v. One West Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Florence v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-
Kamela v. One West
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Reviewing the dismissal of the Kamelas’ claims de novo, -56, ¶ 7, -67 (2012), we hold the superior court properly dismissed their claims under A.R.S.
- 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
- Medley v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Medrano v. Maricopa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- McNamara v. Citizens Protecting Tax Payers 337 P.3d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-
Medley v. State
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-56, ¶¶ 7-8, -67 (2012).
- McNamara v. Citizens Protecting Tax Payers 337 P.3d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Medrano v. Maricopa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Snyder v. banner/goel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Snyder v. banner/goel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Schugg v. Az Brd of Regents Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Schugg v. Az Brd of Regents Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Austin v. W. Surprise Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Austin v. W. Surprise Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Beres v. Beres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-
Beres v. Beres
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 7, (reviewing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion de novo); -69, ¶ 13, - 07 (App. 2009) (noting that law interpreting other statewide rules is applicable when “the language of the family law rules is substantially the same”).
- Lemad v. Miravista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Lemad v. Miravista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Vortex v. denkewicz/engelhard 334 P.3d 734 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- ML Servicing Co. v. Coles 334 P.3d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-
Vortex v. denkewicz/engelhard
334 P.3d 734
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
–56, ¶¶ 7–8, –67 (2012) (internal citation omitted).
- ML Servicing Co. v. Coles 334 P.3d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- Anderson v. Prescott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014