Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Donahue v. Babbitt, 227 P. 995.

40 citing documents.

Phoenix City Prosecutor's Office v. Klausner 118 P.3d 1141 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Phoenix City Prosecutor's Office v. Klausner 118 P.3d 1141 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Similarly, , 227 P. 995 (1924), , 229 P. 696 (1924), our supreme court considered whether the appellants had a right under the Arizona Constitution to jury trials in equity cases where such a right existed by territorial statute at the time the constitution was adopted.
Ottaway v. Smith 113 P.3d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Ottaway v. Smith 113 P.3d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
See Hoyle, 161 Ariz. at 229 , 778 P.2d at 264 (“Even if there was a right to a jury trial in paternity actions under a territorial statute in effect in 1910, article II, section 23 would not have preserved that right."); -50 , 227 P. 995, 996-98 (1924) ( , 141 P. 841 (1914) that Arizona Constitution protects pre-statehood statutory right to jury trial in all law and equity cases).
Hoyle v. Superior Court 778 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Hoyle v. Superior Court 778 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
227 P. 995, 996-97 (1924).
State v. Richey 762 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Richey 762 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Weaver v. Weaver 643 P.2d 499 Ariz. 1982
O'Hair v. O'Hair 508 P.2d 66 Ariz. 1973
O'Hair v. O'Hair 508 P.2d 66 Ariz. 1973
238 , , , , , , , , 227 P. 995 (1924); , 226 P. 908 (1924); , 114 P. 955 (1911), aff’d, 232 U.S. 647 , 34 S.Ct.
Concannon v. Yewell 493 P.2d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Concannon v. Yewell 493 P.2d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
227 P. 995 (1924) ; Sheeley v. Sheeley, 10 Ariz.App.
Kadish v. PHX.-SCOTTS. SPORTS COMPANY 466 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Kadish v. PHX.-SCOTTS. SPORTS COMPANY 466 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
318 , , 227 P. 995 (1924).
Hammontree v. Kenworthy 404 P.2d 816 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Hammontree v. Kenworthy 404 P.2d 816 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
providing that the right of trial by jury should remain “inviolate.” In Donahue v. Babbitt (1924), , 227 P. 995 , it was held that the statement of Brown v. Greer was dicta and was in error; that the right of trial by jury as guaranteed by the Constitution was “ * * * a guaranty of trial by jury as it was known at common law * * * ” ( .)
Rothweiler v. Superior Court of Pima County 402 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Rothweiler v. Superior Court of Pima County 402 P.2d 1010 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
227 P. 995, 996 [1924], which said: “ * * * The constitutional guaranty concerned a plain, permanent right made almost sacred by years of recognition and usage.
Arizona Coffee Shops, Inc. v. Phoenix Downtown Parking Ass'n 387 P.2d 801 Ariz. 1963
Arizona Coffee Shops, Inc. v. Phoenix Downtown Parking Ass'n 387 P.2d 801 Ariz. 1963
295 P. 973 ; , 227 P. 995 .
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. State 177 P.2d 823 Ariz. 1947
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. State 177 P.2d 823 Ariz. 1947
This particular holding in the Greer case (assuming it was correctly determined — , 227 P. 995 ; , 229 P. 696 ; and Davis v. First Nat.
Painter v. Freije 176 P.2d 690 Ariz. 1947
Painter v. Freije 176 P.2d 690 Ariz. 1947
By plaintiff’s second assignment of error, he states: “The court erred in finding for the defendant and against the plaintiff for the reason that plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he * * * *156 had no notice or knowledge of any irregularity or defect in the original payee’s title thereto.” , 227 P. 995, 998 , we said: “Appellant contends that this court should review all the evidence in the case to decide whether the weight of the evidence justified the findings made by th
State v. McEuen 26 P.2d 1005 Ariz. 1933
State v. McEuen 26 P.2d 1005 Ariz. 1933
Rundle v. Winters 298 P. 929 Ariz. 1931
Rundle v. Winters 298 P. 929 Ariz. 1931
Stukey v. Stephens 295 P. 973 Ariz. 1931
Stukey v. Stephens 295 P. 973 Ariz. 1931
Brown v. Greer, supra; , 227 Pac.
Wilson v. Coerver 279 P. 253 Ariz. 1929
Wilson v. Coerver 279 P. 253 Ariz. 1929
Williams v. Williams 243 P. 402 Ariz. 1926
Williams v. Williams 243 P. 402 Ariz. 1926
Security Trust & Savings Bank v. McClure 241 P. 515 Ariz. 1925
Security Trust & Savings Bank v. McClure 241 P. 515 Ariz. 1925
Dragoon Marble & Mining Co. v. McNeish 235 P. 401 Ariz. 1925
Dragoon Marble & Mining Co. v. McNeish 235 P. 401 Ariz. 1925
Miller v. Thompson 229 P. 696 Ariz. 1924