Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Hunt v. Callaghan, 257 P. 648.

33 citing documents.

Az Free Enterprise Club v. Katie Hobbs Ariz. 2022
Az Free Enterprise Club v. Katie Hobbs Ariz. 2022
the second clause’s use of “appropriations.” An appropriation is “the setting aside from the public revenue of a certain sum of money for a specified object, in such manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money, and no more, for that object, and no other.” League of Ariz. Cities & ¶ 15 (2009) ().
ARIZONA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION v. Brewer 243 P.3d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
ARIZONA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION v. Brewer 243 P.3d 619 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
-34 , (applying section 3); -98 , 276 P. 1, 2 (1929) (applying section 9); -59 , 257 P. 648, 655-56 (1927) (same).
ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF PROVIDERS v. State 219 P.3d 216 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF PROVIDERS v. State 219 P.3d 216 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
257 P. 648, 649 (1927) (citations omitted).
League of Ariz. Cities and Towns v. Martin 201 P.3d 517 Ariz. 2009
League of Ariz. Cities and Towns v. Martin 201 P.3d 517 Ariz. 2009
In Hunt v. Callaghan, we defined an appropriation as “the setting aside from the public revenue of a certain sum of money for a specified object, in such manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money, and no more, for that object, and no other.” , 257 P. 648, 649 (1927) (citations omitted).
Forty-Seventh Legislature v. Napolitano 143 P.3d 1023 Ariz. 2006
Forty-Seventh Legislature v. Napolitano 143 P.3d 1023 Ariz. 2006
- 12 - object, in such manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money, and no more, for that object, and no other.” Rios, 172 Ariz. at 6, 833 P.2d at 23 ( 257 P. 648, 649 (1927)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Bennett v. Napolitano 81 P.3d 311 Ariz. 2003
Bennett v. Napolitano 81 P.3d 311 Ariz. 2003
5 An appropriation is “the setting aside from the public revenue of a certain sum of money for a specified object, in such manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money, and no more, for that object, and no other.” ( 257 P. 648, 649 (1927) (citations omitted in Rios)).
Kotterman v. Killian 972 P.2d 606 Ariz. 1999
Kotterman v. Killian 972 P.2d 606 Ariz. 1999
a certain sum of money for a specified object, in such a manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money.” -7 , -24 (1992) ( , 257 P. 648, 649 (1927)).
Rios v. Symington 833 P.2d 20 Ariz. 1992
Rios v. Symington 833 P.2d 20 Ariz. 1992
a. The Creation of Each Special Fund Constituted an Appropriation An appropriation is “the setting aside from the public revenue of a certain sum of money for a specified object, in such manner that the executive officers of the government are authorized to use that money, and no more, for that object, and no other.” , 257 P. 648, 649 (1927) (citations omitted).
Kyrene School District No. 28 v. City of Chandler 722 P.2d 967 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Kyrene School District No. 28 v. City of Chandler 722 P.2d 967 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
the Arizona Supreme Court held that a tax is “the enforced contribution of persons and property levied by the authority of the state.” , 257 P. 648 (1927).
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Transamerica Title Insurance 604 P.2d 1128 Ariz. 1979
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Transamerica Title Insurance 604 P.2d 1128 Ariz. 1979
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Transamerica Title Insurance 604 P.2d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Transamerica Title Insurance 604 P.2d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Cochise County v. Dandoy 567 P.2d 1182 Ariz. 1977
Cochise County v. Dandoy 567 P.2d 1182 Ariz. 1977
Numerous cases are cited in support of this *58 contention, including Carr v. Frohmiller, supra, , 257 P. 648 (1927).
City of Glendale v. Betty 43 P.2d 206 Ariz. 1935
City of Glendale v. Betty 43 P.2d 206 Ariz. 1935
Town of Florence v. Webb 9 P.2d 413 Ariz. 1932
Town of Florence v. Webb 9 P.2d 413 Ariz. 1932
Morris v. State 9 P.2d 404 Ariz. 1932
Morris v. State 9 P.2d 404 Ariz. 1932
Gila Meat Co. v. State, supra; , 257 Pac.
Street v. Commercial Credit Co. 281 P. 46 Ariz. 1929
Gila Meat Co. v. State 276 P. 1 Ariz. 1929
Gila Meat Co. v. State 276 P. 1 Ariz. 1929