Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Mail Boxes v. Industrial Commission, 888 P.2d 777.

187 citing documents.

Estancia Development Associates, L.L.C. v. City of Scottsdale 993 P.2d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Estancia Development Associates, L.L.C. v. City of Scottsdale 993 P.2d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Mail Boxes, Etc. v. Industrial Comm’n
State v. Proctor 2 P.3d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
State v. Proctor 2 P.3d 647 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Ramirez v. Health Partners 972 P.2d 658 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Ramirez v. Health Partners 972 P.2d 658 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Siler v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 972 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Siler v. Arizona Department of Real Estate 972 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Mail Boxes v. Industrial Comm’n of Arizona
STATE EX REL. ARIZ. DEPT. OF REV. v. Short 965 P.2d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
STATE EX REL. ARIZ. DEPT. OF REV. v. Short 965 P.2d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Bothell v. Two Point Acres, Inc. 965 P.2d 47 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
Bothell v. Two Point Acres, Inc. 965 P.2d 47 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
¶ 17 “The primary rule of statutory construction is to find and give effect to legislative intent.” Mail Boxes, etc. v. Industrial Comm’n
De La Cruz v. State 961 P.2d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
De La Cruz v. State 961 P.2d 1070 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1998
¶ 6 We interpret a statute so as to give effect to legislative intent, Mail Boxes, , looking to the language of the statute as “the most rehable indicator of legislative intent.” Alaface v. Nat’l Inv.
Special Fund Division v. Industrial Commission 953 P.2d 541 Ariz. 1998
Special Fund Division v. Industrial Commission 953 P.2d 541 Ariz. 1998
Mail Boxes v. Industrial Comm’n
Bustos v. W.M. Grace Development 966 P.2d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Bustos v. W.M. Grace Development 966 P.2d 1000 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
v. Industrial Comm’n of Ariz.
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
Denton v. Superior Court 945 P.2d 1283 Ariz. 1997
Mail Boxes v. Industrial Comm’n of Ariz.
Arizona Life & Disability Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Honeywell, Inc. 945 P.2d 805 Ariz. 1997
Arizona Life & Disability Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Honeywell, Inc. 945 P.2d 805 Ariz. 1997
See Mail Boxes v. Industrial Comm’n, , (“The primary rule of statutory construction is to find and give effect to legislative intent.”).
Saenz v. STATE FUND WORKERS'S COMP. INS. 943 P.2d 831 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Saenz v. STATE FUND WORKERS'S COMP. INS. 943 P.2d 831 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
v. Industrial Comm'n, -22 , -80 (1995) (primary rule of statutory construction is to give effect to legislative intent and courts will interpret statutes to fulfill the legislature's purpose and avoid senseless results).
Arizona Life & Disability Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Honeywell, Inc. 927 P.2d 806 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Arizona Life & Disability Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Honeywell, Inc. 927 P.2d 806 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
See Mail Boxes, Etc. v. Industrial Comm’n, , (terms in a statute should be defined in a way that “avoids absurdity and fulfills the legislature’s purpose”).
Arizona Department of Revenue v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. 937 P.2d 363 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Arizona Department of Revenue v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. 937 P.2d 363 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Centric-Jones Co. v. Town of Marana 937 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Centric-Jones Co. v. Town of Marana 937 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Mail Boxes v. Industrial Comm’n of Arizona
Transporting Renew. Res. v. Indus. Com'n 917 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Transporting Renewable Resources, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 917 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Transporting Renewable Resources, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 917 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Literal interpretation, in short, leads to a result “such as cannot be contemplated the Legislature intended____” , see also Mail Boxes, Etc., U.S.A v. Industrial Comm’n, , (construing undefined term to avoid absurdity and to fulfill remedial purpose of statute).
Transporting Renew. Res. v. Indus. Com'n 917 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
v. Industrial Comm'n, , (construing undefined term to avoid absurdity and to fulfill remedial purpose of statute).
No Insurance Section/Special Fund Division v. Industrial Commission 927 P.2d 791 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1996