Cited by

of Regents, ("[W]henever possible, this [C]ourt interprets two apparently conflicting statutes in a way that harmonizes them and gives rational meaning to both.").

of Regents, –54 (1994) (“Arizona’s judiciary shares responsibility for the evolution of the law of torts.”).

of Regents, ); see also Cal-Am Props.

of Regents, –56 (1994) (finding a duty of care based on laws prohibiting furnishing alcohol to minors).

of Regents, ); see Restatement (Second) of Torts ("Second Restatement") § 288(g) (1965) ("The court will not adopt as the standard of conduct .

of Regents, 255–56 (1994) (holding that statutes proscribing underage drinking give rise to a duty by non-licensees to refrain from furnishing alcohol to minors); –17 (1983) (stating that statutes barring minors from consuming alcohol create a duty prohibiting liquor licensees from fu

of Regents, (explaining that courts should interpret statutes “in a way that harmonizes them and gives rational meaning to both”).11 Accordingly, the tax court properly entered summary judgment against Mr. House, finding him liable for the tax assessment because he failed to file a timely appeal as required by § 42- 1

of Regents, (a regulation may give rise to a tort duty premised on public policy where it “is designed to protect the class of persons, in which the plaintiff is included, against the risk of the type of harm which has in fact occurred as a result of its violation”); Wickham, 226 Ariz. at 473, ¶¶

of Regents, (quoting W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 36, at 229–30 (5th ed. 1984) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

of Regents, (observing that, when possible, we harmonize “apparently conflicting statutes”); Dietz v. Gen.

of Regents, , ); accord Monroe, 234 Ariz. at 157-58 ¶ 6 n. 2, 318 P.3d at 873 -74 n. 2 (citing Delbridge, 182 Ariz. at 59 , 893 P.2d at 59 ).

¶12 Barkhurst primarily relies on Estate of Hernandez by Hernandez-Wheeler for & P.2d 1330 (1994).

of Regents, -53, -39 (1994) (existence of statute criminalizing conduct one aspect of Arizona law supporting recognition of tort duty).

of Regents, , (quoting W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 36, at 229-30 (5th ed.1984) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

of Regents, , 251 n. 6, , 1337 n. 6 (1994).

of Regents, , (finding a duty existed when fraternity members furnished alcohol to underaged consumers).

of Regents, (expression of several items in a class suggests intent to exclude unexpressed items of the same class).

of Regents, , see also Ontiveros, 136 Ariz. at 509 , 667 P.2d at 209 (“Even if the existence of a tavern owner’s duty to act with care when furnishing liquor to patrons could not be found by application of common law principle and authority, its existence could be postulated upon the affirmative r