DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Solomon v. Findley, 808 P.2d 294.

28 citing documents.

  • Thomas-Hoffman v. Hoffman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • Thomas-Hoffman v. Hoffman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    at ¶ 17; 4 (explaining that when there is no merger, rights arising out of the separation agreement can only be enforced by bringing a separate action on the contract, by obtaining a judgment thereon, and then enforcing it as any other civil judgment).
  • Rosenbaum v. Lovely Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Rosenbaum v. Lovely Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Benninghoff v. Benninghoff Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • Benninghoff v. Benninghoff Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • In Re the Marriage of Rojas 530 P.3d 1167 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
  • In Re the Marriage of Rojas 530 P.3d 1167 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
    ¶17 Such an MSA (or its provisions) are not enforceable as an element of a judgment or decree as under § 25-317(E), but can only be enforced by “a separate action on the contract, by obtaining a judgment thereon and then enforcing it as any other civil judgment.”
  • Strobel v. Rosier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Strobel v. Rosier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    –12 (1991), our supreme court held that the superior court lacked authority to enforce child support provisions after a child reached majority, but the parties’ agreement to pay college expenses was enforceable as an independent contract claim.
  • Botto v. Botto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • Botto v. Botto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    ¶3 Father moved to dismiss mother’s petition, arguing he made all the tuition arrangements required by the PSA and that mother should have brought her claims as a -12 (1991).
  • Jensen v. Beirne 386 P.3d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
  • Jensen v. Beirne 386 P.3d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
    (overruling Genda "insofar as it purports to permit the [court] independent of statutory authority to enforce provisions in a divorce decree for payment of support after a child reaches the age of majority"), -12 , -97 (1991).
  • Jones v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
  • Jones v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
    approved, P.2d 294 (1991) (“[A]ny action taken by a court which does not have jurisdiction is void and a nullity.”).
  • Danielson v. Evans 36 P.3d 749 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
  • Danielson v. Evans 36 P.3d 749 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
  • Marriage of LaPrade v. LaPrade 941 P.2d 1268 Ariz. 1997
  • Marriage of LaPrade v. LaPrade 941 P.2d 1268 Ariz. 1997
    (stating that where merger has not occurred, “rights arising out of the separation agreement can only be enforced by bringing a separate action on the contract, by obtaining a judgment thereon and then enforcing it as any other civil judgment”), overruled on other grounds, , Savage v. Thompson, 22 Ariz.App.
  • Arvizu v. Fernandez 902 P.2d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • Arvizu v. Fernandez 902 P.2d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • Steiner v. Steiner 880 P.2d 1152 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
  • Steiner v. Steiner 880 P.2d 1152 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
    For this proposition, he relies principally on language in Solomon v. Findley that a “contract for post-majority support should be enforced in a separate contract action.”
  • Mendoza v. Mendoza 870 P.2d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
  • Mendoza v. Mendoza 870 P.2d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
  • Guzman v. Guzman 854 P.2d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • Guzman v. Guzman 854 P.2d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993