Cited by

See Conklin v. Medtronic, Inc., ¶ 22 (2018) (analyzing first if the plaintiff had a claim under Arizona law before deciding preemption); – 13 ¶ 10 (2016) (criticizing this court for finding federal preemption because “[d]eciding whether the Arizona hospital lien statutes are preempted is 4 FHMC, et al. BLUE CROSS Decision of the Court unnecessary in det

By way of example: • for the proposition that “[a] de minimis payment, absent a substantive dispute over specific charges, does not constitute a bona fide attempt to compromise.” But the case never mentions “de minimis payment,” and instead holds that the settlement of a bona

Applicability of the APA rulemaking process to the EPM ¶16 “We review de novo an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.”

3 GRAHAM v. CARPENTER, et al. Decision of the Court I. Motion to Dismiss ¶8 “We review de novo an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.” ¶ 7 (2016).

DISCUSSION ¶16 “We review de novo an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.” ¶ 7 (2016).

An “accord and satisfaction discharges a contractual obligation or cause of action when the parties agree to exchange something of value in resolution of a claim or demand and then perform on that agreement.” ¶ 11 (2016).

As our supreme court has made clear, “[t]he settlement of a controversy is valid and binding, not because it is the settlement of a valid claim, but because it is the settlement of a controversy.” ¶ 12 (2016) ( disapproved on other grounds by Ariz. Pub.

¶ 10 (2016) ("courts should not unnecessarily decide constitutional questions"); Aitken v. Indus.