Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Robert Baker v. University Physicians Healthcare, 296 P.3d 42.

120 citing documents.

Mendoza v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Mendoza v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 30 (2013) (stating that the abuse of discretion standard “equally applies to admissibility questions in summary judgment proceedings”).
Stith v. Ensign Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Stith v. Ensign Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
In support of this 9 STITH v. ENSIGN, et al. Decision of the Court contention, ¶¶ 35-36 (2013) ("A court may not, consistent with the Arizona Constitution, prohibit a plaintiff from bringing a common law tort action.").
Rasor v. Nw. Hosp. LLC 419 P.3d 956 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Rasor v. Nw. Hosp. LLC 419 P.3d 956 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Physicians Healthcare , , ¶ 30
Muscat v. Creative 418 P.3d 967 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Muscat v. Creative 418 P.3d 967 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 39 (2013), we are aware of no authority suggesting that “injuries” under the anti-abrogation clause should be interpreted differently than “injuries” recognized under tort law, see Samaritan Health Sys.
Betancourt v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Betancourt v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 30 (2013).
rasor/miller v. Northwest Hospital LLC Ariz. 2017
rasor/miller v. Northwest Hospital LLC Ariz. 2017
Physicians Healthcare, and, alternatively, if ICU nurses are considered generalists, Ho was not a practicing generalist in the year prior to Rasor’s injury.
Pawn 1st LLC v. City of Phoenix/jachimek 399 P.3d 94 Ariz. 2017
Pawn 1st LLC v. City of Phoenix/jachimek 399 P.3d 94 Ariz. 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 30 (2013), and we presume the validity of the Board’s determination unless it is “against the weight of the evidence, unreasonable, erroneous, or illegal as a matter of law.” Mueller v. City of Phoenix ex rel.
State v. McCcd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State ex rel. Brnovich v. Maricopa County Community College District Board 395 P.3d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. McCcd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8 (2013)), and “[i]t is our duty to uphold statutes, if their language will permit, even though the statute may not be artfully drawn,” State v. Book-Cellar, Inc., ().
State ex rel. Brnovich v. Maricopa County Community College District Board 395 P.3d 714 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8 , ), and “[i]t is our duty to uphold statutes, if their language will permit, even though the statute may not be artfully drawn,” State v. Book-Cellar, Inc., , , 551 (App. 1984) ( , ).
Caravetta v. Duick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Caravetta v. Duick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 30 (2013) (-66 (1974)).
St. George v. Plimpton 384 P.3d 1243 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
St. George v. Plimpton 384 P.3d 1243 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 30 (2013) (“Baker II”) (expert qualifications); ¶ 73 (App. 2006) (Rule 56(f) relief).
Franklin v. Clemett 382 P.3d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Franklin v. Clemett 382 P.3d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Physicians Healthcare, - 88, ¶ 34, -51 (2013) (citation omitted).
Premier Physicians Group, PLLC v. Navarro 377 P.3d 988 Ariz. 2016
Premier Physicians Group, PLLC v. Navarro 377 P.3d 988 Ariz. 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Reinstein 381 P.3d 236 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Phx News v. Hon reinstein/state/moran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Reinstein 381 P.3d 236 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Physicians Healthcare, , 383 ¶ 8
Phx News v. Hon reinstein/state/moran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8
State of Arizona v. Samkeita Jahveh Jurden 373 P.3d 543 Ariz. 2016
State of Arizona v. Samkeita Jahveh Jurden 373 P.3d 543 Ariz. 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8
State of Arizona Ex Rel. Polk v. Hon. campbell/francis Frederick Kraps 372 P.3d 929 Ariz. 2016
State of Arizona Ex Rel. Polk v. Hon. campbell/francis Frederick Kraps 372 P.3d 929 Ariz. 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8
Rasor v. Northwest Hospital, LLC Dba Northwest Medical Center 373 P.3d 563 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Rasor v. Northwest Hospital, LLC Dba Northwest Medical Center 373 P.3d 563 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Marriage of Ames v. Ames 370 P.3d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Marriage of Ames v. Ames 370 P.3d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8 (2013).
Amanda Watts v. Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation 365 P.3d 944 Ariz. 2016
Amanda Watts v. Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation 365 P.3d 944 Ariz. 2016
Physicians Healthcare, ¶¶ 34–35, (discussing that the plaintiff still had a reasonable possibility of obtaining legal redress under the applicable statute); Nunez, 229 Ariz. at 122–23 ¶¶ 24–26, 271 P.3d at 1109–10 (discussing that the application of a different duty of care did not violate the anti-abrogation cla
Jhass Group L.L.C. v. Arizona Department of Financial Institutions 360 P.3d 1029 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Jhass Group L.L.C. v. Arizona Department of Financial Institutions 360 P.3d 1029 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8 (2013).
Preston v. Amadei 357 P.3d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Preston v. Amadei 357 P.3d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 30 (2013).
tempe/chavez v. state/brnovich 351 P.3d 367 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
tempe/chavez v. state/brnovich 351 P.3d 367 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8 (2013).
Arizona Bank & Trust v. James R. Barrons Trust 351 P.3d 1099 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Arizona Bank & Trust v. James R. Barrons Trust 351 P.3d 1099 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Physicians Healthcare, ¶ 8
Gallagher v. Tucson Unified School District 349 P.3d 228 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
Gallagher v. Tucson Unified School District 349 P.3d 228 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015