Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., 841 P.2d 198.

62 citing documents.

JOSEPH E. TERBORG v. TOWN OF PAYSON Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
JOSEPH E. TERBORG v. TOWN OF PAYSON Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
Talking Rock v. Inscription Canyon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Talking Rock v. Inscription Canyon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
The court construes a contract “in its entirety and in such a way that every part is given effect.” Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
North v. Ubiquity Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
North v. Ubiquity Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 187 (1971).
Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Trap-Zap v. Facilitysource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
According to the Restatement, “the parties’ choice-of-law applies if the parties could have resolved explicitly a particular issue in their contract.” Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (citing Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 187(1) (1971)).
Pinal Cnty. v. Fuller 429 P.3d 570 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Pinal Cnty. v. Fuller 429 P.3d 570 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc. , , 210
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
See Cordon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (“Procedural matters are generally governed by the law of the forum state.”) (citing Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 122 (1971)); (“[R]ules of evidence are procedural in nature.”).
First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Morari 399 P.3d 109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Morari 399 P.3d 109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Arizona courts apply the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws (1971) (“Restatement”) to determine the applicable law in a contract action, Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., , cf. Pounders v. Enserch E & C, Inc., , (Restatement applied in determining choice of law for wrongful death claim).
ZB, N.A. v. Hoeller 395 P.3d 704 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
ZB, N.A. v. Hoeller 395 P.3d 704 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ciena Capital Funding, LLC v. Krieg's, Inc. 394 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Ciena Capital Funding, LLC v. Krieg's, Inc. 394 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
Norton v. Phonejockey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Norton v. Phonejockey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (“[S]ubstantive matters are governed by ‘the law of the jurisdiction to which the court is referred by the choice-of-law rules of the forum.’” (citation omitted)).
Jp Morgan v. Mgm Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Jp Morgan v. Mgm Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Corp., see also Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (citing Mid Kansas for the proposition that “if [a] deed of trust holder purchases property at [a] trustee’s sale, its interest in [the] deed of trust merges in the fee and [the] deed of trust no longer exists”).
Rene Castro v. Hon. Peter J. Hochuli C.C. 343 P.3d 457 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
Rene Castro v. Hon. Peter J. Hochuli C.C. 343 P.3d 457 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
Sec., cf. Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (accepting special action jurisdiction in part because relief would end litigation and “spare[] the parties and the judicial system unnecessary time and expense”).
Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (citing Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 122 (1971) (“Procedural matters are generally governed by the law of the forum state.”)); (“[R]ules of evidence are procedural in nature.”).
Callies v. United Heritage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Callies v. United Heritage Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
Tucson Unified School District v. Gallagher Corum 322 P.3d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Tucson Unified School District v. Gallagher Corum 322 P.3d 181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Actions 1 (“[T]he special action shall not be available where there is an equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal.”); Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., (accepting special action jurisdiction in part because relief would end litigation and “eliminate[] the necessity of any future appeals, and spare[] the parties and the judicial system unnecessary time and expense”).
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
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
Parkway Bank & Trust Co. v. Zivkovic 304 P.3d 1109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Parkway Bank & Trust Co. v. Zivkovic 304 P.3d 1109 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
¶ 11 Whether a creditor may bring an action on a deficiency judgment “is a matter of substantive law.” Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
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
I. Choice of law ¶ 7 Although the law of the forum state governs procedural matters, substantive issues are resolved by “the law of the jurisdiction to which the court is referred by the choice-of-law rules of the forum.” Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., , (citations omitted).
Swanson v. Image Bank, Inc. 77 P.3d 439 Ariz. 2003
Swanson v. Image Bank, Inc. 77 P.3d 439 Ariz. 2003
Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company 75 P.3d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
We construe a contract “in its entirety and in such a way that every part is given effect.” Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.
Swanson v. Image Bank, Inc. 43 P.3d 174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Swanson v. Image Bank, Inc. 43 P.3d 174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
¶20 “In Arizona, courts follow the Restatement [(Second) of Conflict of Laws (1971)] to determine which state’s law applies in a contract action.” Cardon v. Cotton *233 Lane Holdings, Inc.
Beckler v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 987 P.2d 768 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Beckler v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 987 P.2d 768 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., , (issue relating to deficiency of the judgment was substantive and, therefore, determined by Arizona’s choice of law).
Knauss v. DND Neffson Co. 963 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Knauss v. DND Neffson Co. 963 P.2d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
Matter of Guardianship/Conservatorship of Denton 945 P.2d 1283 Ariz. 1997
Denton v. Superior Court 945 P.2d 1283 Ariz. 1997
Matter of Guardianship/Conservatorship of Denton 945 P.2d 1283 Ariz. 1997
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., , (factor in court's decision to accept special action jurisdiction was that issue was question of law).
Denton v. Superior Court 945 P.2d 1283 Ariz. 1997
See Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc., , (factor in court’s decision to accept special action jurisdiction was that issue was question of law).