DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Estate of Reinen v. Northern Arizona Orthopedics, Ltd., 9 P.3d 314.

98 citing documents.

  • Charlotte G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Charlotte G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Arizona Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 9, (stating “[a]n objection to proffered testimony must be made either prior to or at the time it is given, and failure to do so constitutes a waiver”).
  • Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Fuqua v. Dollar Tree Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    and states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context.”); Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., -87, ¶ 9, -18 (2000) (“An objection to proffered testimony must be made either prior to or at the time it is given, and failure to do so constitutes a waiver.”).
  • Fuqua v. Dollar Tree Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., -87, -18 (2000) (defense counsel who purposely did not object to expert witness’ qualifications or the foundation for his opinions during testimony waived those legal objections); (Defendant who stipulated to foundation for admission of
  • Southwest v. Burns Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • Southwest v. Burns Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12, (citations omitted) (stating the “credibility of a witness’ testimony and the weight it should be given are issues particularly within the province of the” finder of fact).
  • CSA 13-101 Loop, LLC v. Loop 101, LLC 312 P.3d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
  • CSA 13-101 Loop, LLC v. Loop 101, LLC 312 P.3d 1121 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
    Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orth., Ltd., , 286 ¶ 9, (failure to object waives claim on appeal).
  • Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered 273 P.3d 645 Ariz. 2012
  • Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered 273 P.3d 645 Ariz. 2012
    Estate 8 of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12, (“The court or jury is not compelled to believe the uncontradicted evidence of an interested party.”); In re Wainola’s Estate, (1
  • McBride v. KIECKHEFER ASSOCIATES, INC. 265 P.3d 1061 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
  • McBride v. KIECKHEFER ASSOCIATES, INC. 265 P.3d 1061 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
    See Estate of Reinen v. Northern Arizona Orthopedics, Ltd., -88, ¶¶ 12, 15 , -19 (2000); Thompson v. Better-Bilt Aluminum Products Co., Inc.
  • Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered 258 P.3d 172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
  • Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists Chartered 258 P.3d 172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
    Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12
  • State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
  • State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
    Hargrave did not raise this objection at trial, see Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 9, (applying contemporaneous objection rule), and does not persuasively argue that any error in this respect was fundamental.
  • Salica v. Tucson Heart Hospital - Carondelet, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
  • Salica v. Tucson Heart Hospital - Carondelet, L.L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
    ¶18 Indeed, the present case is factually similar to Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., P.3d 314 (2000).
  • In Re Mh Xxxx-Xxxxxx 229 P.3d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • In Re Mh Xxxx-Xxxxxx 229 P.3d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
    Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 9
  • In re MH 2009-001264 229 P.3d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • In re MH 2009-001264 229 P.3d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
    “An objection to proffered testimony must be made either prior to or at the time it is given, and failure to do so constitutes a waiver.” Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 9
  • Gaveck v. Arizona State Board of Podiatry Examiners 215 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • Gaveck v. Arizona State Board of Podiatry Examiners 215 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12 , (“The court or jury is not compelled to believe the uncontradieted evidence of an interested party.” ( , )); Nystrom v. Mass. Cas.
  • Seisinger v. Siebel 195 P.3d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
  • Seisinger v. Siebel 195 P.3d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
    App.1990) (holding expert who had no first-hand experience with obstetrical delivery in Arizona could nevertheless testify as to the minimum standard of care applicable in every state, including Arizona; “The lack of first-hand experience may affect the weight to be given the expert’s testimony, but does not altogether preclude its admissibility.”); Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12 , (“The credibility of a witness’ testimony and the weight it should be given are issues partic
  • Belliard v. Becker 166 P.3d 911 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
  • Belliard v. Becker 166 P.3d 911 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
    “The credibility of a witness’ testimony and the weight it should be given are issues particularly within the province of the jury.” Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12 , (quoting Kuhnke v. Textron, Inc., , ) (internal quotation marks omitted); , (holding this court will not reweigh conflicting evidence pres
  • White v. Greater Arizona Bicycling Association 163 P.3d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
  • Distinguished White v. Greater Arizona Bicycling Association 163 P.3d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
    Instead, the facts of those cases contain clear reasons for the fact-finder to disregard the relevant testimony and are therefore distinguishable from the matter before us. ¶ 24 In Estate of Reinen v. Northern Arizona Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶¶ 11-12 , a medical malpractice action, our supreme court stated the jury was “not compelled to believe the uncontradieted evidence” of the defendant doctor who testified he would not have changed the plaintiffs treatment had he examined the plaintiff.
  • Airfreight Express, Ltd. v. Evergreen Air Center, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
  • Airfreight Express, Ltd. v. Evergreen Air Center, Inc. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
    Cf. Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., 198 Ariz. 283, ¶ 9, (“An objection to proffered testimony must be made either prior to or at the time it is given, and failure to do so constitutes a waiver.”).
  • Gorney v. Meaney Rincon Orthopedic Associates, P.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
  • Gorney v. Meaney Rincon Orthopedic Associates, P.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. 5 Orthopedics, Ltd., (evaluating credibility of witnesses particularly within province of jury).
  • Acuna v. Hampton And Kroack Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
  • Acuna v. Hampton And Kroack Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., (“The court or jury is not compelled to believe the uncontradicted evidence of an interested party.”).
  • Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc. 111 P.3d 1003 Ariz. 2005
  • Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc. 111 P.3d 1003 Ariz. 2005
    See, e.g., Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 18 , (applying Article 18, Section 5 to a medical malpractice case); -24 , -91 (1990) (applying Article 18, Section 5 in suit for defendant’s negligent furnishing of alcohol to man who subsequently shot plaintiff in defendant’s parki
  • Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
  • Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
    See Estate of Reinen v. N. Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 12
  • State v. Whitley 85 P.3d 116 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
  • State v. Whitley 85 P.3d 116 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
    Estate of Reinen v. Northern Arizona Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶ 26
  • State v. Cañez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
  • State v. Canez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
  • State v. Cañez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
    Estate of Reinen v. Northern Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., , , 318 ¶ 12 (2000).
  • State v. Canez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
    Estate of Reinen v. Northern Ariz. Orthopedics, Ltd., ¶12 (2000).