Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Garver v. Thoman, 135 P. 724.

41 citing documents.

Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Ader v. Estate of Felger 375 P.3d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
¶30 “Expenses of administration” are “[e]xpenses incurred by a decedent’s representatives in administering the estate.” Expenses of Administration, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014); 135 P. 724, 725 (1913) (describing “expenses of administration” as debts incurred while locating and disposing of estate assets and obligations).
Johnson v. Walton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Johnson v. Walton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Dombey v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 708 P.2d 742 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Dombey v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 708 P.2d 742 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
135 P. 724 (1913); see also, de Funiak and Vaughn § 124 at 310.
Gonzalez v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 570 P.2d 1077 Ariz. 1977
Gonzalez v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 570 P.2d 1077 Ariz. 1977
125 P. 707 (1912); , 135 P. 724 (1913)
Olson v. Neale 570 P.2d 209 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Olson v. Neale 570 P.2d 209 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
In those cases the vendor had either deliberately bypassed the broker, e. g., , , 226 P. 203 (1924); or the action involved a contest between two brokers for the right to a commission, e. g., , 135 P. 724 (1913), , 149 P. 384 (1915)
Estate of Hash v. Henderson 507 P.2d 99 Ariz. 1973
Elerick v. Elerick 466 P.2d 778 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Elerick v. Elerick 466 P.2d 778 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Elerick v. Rocklin 425 P.2d 103 Ariz. 1967
Elerick v. Rocklin 425 P.2d 103 Ariz. 1967
135 P. 724 ; Stockmen’s State Bank v. Merchant’s and Stockgrower’s Bank, , 197 P. 888 .
Galbraith v. Johnston 373 P.2d 587 Ariz. 1962
Galbraith v. Johnston 373 P.2d 587 Ariz. 1962
Graybar Electric Company v. McClave 371 P.2d 350 Ariz. 1962
Graybar Electric Company v. McClave 371 P.2d 350 Ariz. 1962
Mortensen v. Knight 305 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1956
Mortensen v. Knight 305 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1956
11 P. 314 ; La Tourette v. La Tourette, supra; , 135 P. 724 ; , 138 P. 1053 , L.R.A.1915A, 491.
Bowser v. Sandige 250 P.2d 589 Ariz. 1952
Bowser v. Sandige 250 P.2d 589 Ariz. 1952
Albert v. Goor 218 P.2d 736 Ariz. 1950
Albert v. Goor 218 P.2d 736 Ariz. 1950
Shattuck v. Shattuck 192 P.2d 229 Ariz. 1948
Shattuck v. Shattuck 192 P.2d 229 Ariz. 1948
125 P. 707 ; , 135 P. 724 .
Clark v. Ellsworth 184 P.2d 821 Ariz. 1947
Clark v. Ellsworth 184 P.2d 821 Ariz. 1947
Shreeve v. Greer 173 P.2d 641 Ariz. 1946
Shreeve v. Greer 173 P.2d 641 Ariz. 1946
Fink v. Williamson 158 P.2d 159 Ariz. 1945
Fink v. Williamson 158 P.2d 159 Ariz. 1945
Horne v. Blakely 274 P. 173 Ariz. 1929
Horne v. Blakely 274 P. 173 Ariz. 1929
Ellsworth v. Struckmeyer 232 P. 56 Ariz. 1925
Ellsworth v. Struckmeyer 232 P. 56 Ariz. 1925
If we are to treat them as an attempt to establish a claim on contract against the estate as creditors thereof, , 135 Pac.
Benson v. Hunter 202 P. 233 Ariz. 1921
Benson v. Hunter 202 P. 233 Ariz. 1921
Leadville Mining Co. v. Hemphill 149 P. 384 Ariz. 1915
Leadville Mining Co. v. Hemphill 149 P. 384 Ariz. 1915
The theory was pressed with more ingenuity than skill that appellee and interveners were, under their respective employment, rival brokers; , 135 Pac.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by