Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Ruiz v. Hull, 957 P.2d 984.

111 citing documents.

McDonald v. Thomas 12 P.3d 1194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In its generic sense, the term applies to all “acts by an officer in his official capacity under color and by virtue of his office.” ¶ 31 , (quoting Kerby v. State ex rel.
State v. Gill 11 P.3d 1043 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Gill 11 P.3d 1043 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In doing so, “we must read the statute as a whole and give meaningful operation to each of its provisions.” ¶ 35
Eller Media Co. v. City of Tucson 7 P.3d 136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2000
Eller Media Co. v. City of Tucson 7 P.3d 136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2000
(laws directed at speech and communication subject to heightened scrutiny), cert.
State v. Bonnewell 2 P.3d 682 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State v. Bonnewell 2 P.3d 682 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
¶25 , ¶ 25 (1998), cert.
Herman v. City of Tucson 4 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Herman v. City of Tucson 4 P.3d 973 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
In addition, “we must read the statute as a whole and give meaningful operation to each of its provisions.” , cert, denied sub nom.
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Great Western Publishing, Inc. 3 P.3d 992 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Great Western Publishing, Inc. 3 P.3d 992 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999