Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re Estate of Pouser, 975 P.2d 704.

151 citing documents.

In Re: Ms2009-000010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
& Source, ¶ 25 (2000) (citing Pouser v. Pouser (Estate of Pouser), ¶ 13 (1999)).
Munguia v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Munguia v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Otto v. Otto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Otto v. Otto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 13 (1999) (citation omitted).
McSo v. McLeo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
McSo v. McLeo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
“Substantial evidence is any relevant evidence from which a reasonable mind might draw a conclusion.” ¶ 12 (App. 2003) (internal quotations and citations omitted); ¶ 13 (1999).
Lopez v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lopez v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Mashler v. Mashler 442 P.3d 805 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Mashler v. Mashler 442 P.3d 805 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Williams v. Stapley-Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Williams v. Stapley-Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Schultz v. Schultz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Schultz v. Schultz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
We do not reassess “conflicting evidence or redetermine the preponderance of the evidence, but examine the record only to determine whether substantial evidence exists to support the trial court’s action.” ¶ 13 (1999).
Else v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Else v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
5 ELSE v. ACC, et al. Decision of the Court the Commission’s result” ( ¶ 13 (1999))).
Ryan v. Henry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ryan v. Henry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Commerce v. Zinke Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Commerce v. Zinke Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“Substantial evidence is evidence which would permit a reasonable person to reach the [fact-finder’s] result.” ¶ 13 (1999).
Simon v. Simon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Simon v. Simon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Prescott v. Prescott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Prescott v. Prescott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 13, Hurd, ¶ 16, (“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence or re- determining the preponderance of the evidence.”).
Downum v. Downum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Downum v. Downum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
masci/mcalister v. Masci Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
masci/mcalister v. Masci Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Id.; In re Gardiner’s Estate, -41 (1967); ¶ 10 (1999).
Wootton v. Blair Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Wootton v. Blair Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Koma v. Walter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Koma v. Walter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See In re Thomas’ Estate, (noting superior court’s decision regarding testamentary capacity will be affirmed if supported by substantial evidence).
Great Western Bank v. LJC Development, LLC 362 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Great Western Bank v. LJC Development, LLC 362 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sierra Club—Grand Canyon Chapter v. Arizona Corp. Commission 354 P.3d 1127 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sierra Club—Grand Canyon Chapter v. Arizona Corp. Commission 354 P.3d 1127 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Potts v. Potts Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Potts v. Potts Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Honeywell v. Kilgore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Honeywell v. Kilgore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
4 ¶ 13 (1999); -48, ¶ 13 (App. 1998).
Wagner v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Wagner v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Shifflett v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Shifflett v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 13, Hurd, 223 Ariz. at 52, ¶ 16, 219 P.3d at 262 (“Our duty on review does not include re-weighing conflicting evidence or redetermining the preponderance of the evidence.”).
Keland v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Keland v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
We view the evidence in the light most favorable to upholding the superior court’s judgment, ¶ 2, and will affirm if any evidence supports the judgment
Berkley v. Koenig Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Berkley v. Koenig Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 13, (reweighing evidence); -48, ¶ 13, -81 (App. 1998) (witness credibility).
Laroya v. Laroya Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014