Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Hayes v. Continental Insurance, 872 P.2d 668.

433 citing documents.

Hiskett v. Hon. lambert/state 451 P.3d 408 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Hiskett v. Hon. lambert/state 451 P.3d 408 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Dignity Health v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz. 444 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Dignity Health v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz. 444 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Co. , , 268, , 672 (1994).
Marcie Normandin v. Encanto Adventures 441 P.3d 439 Ariz. 2019
Marcie Normandin v. Encanto Adventures 441 P.3d 439 Ariz. 2019
Co., (noting that “if possible we construe statutes to avoid unnecessary resolution of constitutional issues”).
Dignity v. Farmers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Dignity v. Farmers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
SK Builders, Inc. v. Smith 436 P.3d 519 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
SK Builders, Inc. v. Smith 436 P.3d 519 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
Co. , , 268, , 672 (1994).
Cleckner v. Adhs 433 P.3d 1200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Cleckner v. Adhs 433 P.3d 1200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Co., 7 CLECKNER v. AZ DEPT. OF HEALTH SERVICES, et al. Opinion of the Court ("When seeking to ascertain the intent of legislators, courts normally give little or no weight to comments made at committee hearings by nonlegislators.").
Joshua Stanwitz v. reagan/outlaw Dirty Money 429 P.3d 1138 Ariz. 2018
Joshua Stanwitz v. reagan/outlaw Dirty Money 429 P.3d 1138 Ariz. 2018
Co., (noting that, if possible, “we construe statutes to avoid unnecessary resolution of constitutional issues”).
Tapia v. Indus. Comm'n of Ariz. 426 P.3d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Tapia v. Indus. Comm'n of Ariz. 426 P.3d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Co. , , 268, , 672 (1994) ( § 23-930(E) directs Industrial Commission to adopt definition of unfair claim processing).
Normandin v. Encanto 425 P.3d 243 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Normandin v. Encanto 425 P.3d 243 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Realty of Ariz., see also Hayes v. Cont’l Ins., (“[I]f possible we construe statutes to avoid unnecessary resolution of constitutional issues.”).
Sun Lakes v. state/ador Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sun Lakes v. state/ador Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Smith 899 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 2017
Bsi v. Adot 399 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Bsi v. Adot 399 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Co., (A statute is ambiguous if its text “allows for more than one rational interpretation.”).
In re the Marriage of Friedman 397 P.3d 1063 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
S.S., S.S. v. Stephanie H. 388 P.3d 569 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
S.S., S.S. v. Stephanie H. 388 P.3d 569 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Kimberly McLaughlin v. Suzan McLaughlin 382 P.3d 118 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Kimberly McLaughlin v. Suzan McLaughlin 382 P.3d 118 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Co., -73, -77 (1994) (“[I]f possible, this court construes statutes to avoid rendering them unconstitutional.”).
Ziegfield v. Ador Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ziegfield v. Ador Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
ades/taylor v. Pandola 382 P.3d 101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
ades/taylor v. Pandola 382 P.3d 101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
McCarthy Integrated System, LLC v. Evoqua Water Technologies, LLC 379 P.3d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
McCarthy Integrated System, LLC v. Evoqua Water Technologies, LLC 379 P.3d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Stambaugh v. Butler 379 P.3d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Stambaugh v. Butler 379 P.3d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State of Arizona v. Maverick Kemp Gray 372 P.3d 999 Ariz. 2016
In Re the Marriage of Margain and Ruiz-Bours 372 P.3d 313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
In Re the Marriage of Margain and Ruiz-Bours 372 P.3d 313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
siete/mesquite v. ador/mar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
siete/mesquite v. ador/mar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co., (“If a statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, we apply it without resorting to other methods of statutory interpretation.”).
State of Arizona v. Michael Anthony Salcido 362 P.3d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Michael Anthony Salcido 362 P.3d 508 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State v. Reyes 360 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Reyes 360 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Jerry Charles Holle 358 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jerry Charles Holle 358 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
Co., -73, -77 (1994) (alteration in Lockwood).
Stenz v. Industrial Commission 353 P.3d 361 Ariz. 2015

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by