Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Martin v. Sears, 44 P.2d 526.

25 citing documents.

McMahan v. Grasshopper Ariz. 2026
(stating that “[w]hen a default is entered, a defaulted party loses all rights to litigate the merits of the cause of action,” but can participate prospectively in the default judgment proceedings); (“So long as parties are in default, they have no right to participate in any further proceedings in the case, except a motion to set aside the default and petition for leave to appear and answer, or some similar matter not going to plaintiff’s right of action.”); Ariz. R. Civ.
Tarr v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR PIMA COUNTY 690 P.2d 68 Ariz. 1984
Tarr v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR PIMA COUNTY 690 P.2d 68 Ariz. 1984
Citing Long-Cleveland-Hayhurst & , , the court stated that this late answer did not constitute an appearance because: “[w]hen a party is defaulted he has no right to participate in any further proceedings in the case, except to file a motion to set aside the default and petition for leave to appear and answer.” We disagree with the
U-Totem Store v. Walker 691 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
U-Totem Store v. Walker 691 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Tarr v. Superior Court in & for Pima County 690 P.2d 90 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Tarr v. Superior Court in & for Pima County 690 P.2d 90 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
See Long-Cleveland-Hayhurst & Co.
Anderson v. Wilson 680 P.2d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Anderson v. Wilson 680 P.2d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Long-Cleveland-Hayhurst &amp
Sears Roebuck and Co. v. Walker 621 P.2d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Moody v. Lloyd’s of London, , ; , ; , 71 P. 926 .
Sears Roebuck and Co. v. Walker 621 P.2d 938 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
The motion to dismiss, however, was not logically cognizable by the trial court while the defendants-appellants were in default because, , : “So long as parties are in default, they have no right to participate in any further proceedings in the case, except a motion to set aside the default and petition for leave to appear and answer, or some similar matter not going to plaintiff’s right of action, [citations omitted].” Id.
Industrial Commission of Arizona v. Parise 478 P.2d 137 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Industrial Commission of Arizona v. Parise 478 P.2d 137 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
See also, , 71 P. 926 (1903); , ; , ; , .
Byrer v. AB Robbs Trust Company 466 P.2d 751 Ariz. 1970
Byrer v. AB Robbs Trust Company 466 P.2d 751 Ariz. 1970
71 P. 926 .” 89 Ariz. at 291 , 361 P.2d at 548 .
LONG-CLEVELAND-HAYHURST & CO., MG AGTS. v. Peterson 369 P.2d 666 Ariz. 1962
LONG-CLEVELAND-HAYHURST & CO., MG AGTS. v. Peterson 369 P.2d 666 Ariz. 1962
the Supreme Court stated: “So long as parties are in default, they have no right to participate in any further proceedings in the case, except a motion to set aside the default and petition for' leave to appear and answer, or some similar matter not going to the plaintiff’s right of action.
Horne v. Superior Court 361 P.2d 547 Ariz. 1961
Horne v. Superior Court 361 P.2d 547 Ariz. 1961
Moody v. Lloyd’s of London, , ; , ; , 71 P. 926 .
Moody v. Lloyd's of London 152 P.2d 951 Ariz. 1944
Moody v. Lloyd's of London 152 P.2d 951 Ariz. 1944
The remedy of a party in such case is to apply to the court to have the default opened, or to have the order or judgment set aside, and he can thus obtain all the relief he ought to have.” , 44 Pac.
Perrin, Jr. v. Perrin Properties, Inc. 86 P.2d 23 Ariz. 1939
Perrin, Jr. v. Perrin Properties, Inc. 86 P.2d 23 Ariz. 1939