Source: http://www.omlaw.com/azapp-blog/postings/2011/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 20:27:14+00:00

Document:
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Applies Exhaustion of Remedies Doctrine to Declaratory Judgment Action Seeking Interpretation of Zoning Statute.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Law Enforcement Officers Who Arrest a Suspect Pursuant to a Warrant And Are Confronted With Readily Available Information That Objectively Casts Doubt on the Warrant’s Validity May Not Proceed With the Arrest Without Further Reasonable Inquiry Into the Validity of the Warrant.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That A.R.S. § 14-3952, Which Governs Compromises in the Will and Probate Context, Requires Signatures By all Persons with Beneficial Interests in the Estate.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That a Deed Restriction Mandating Membership in Community Recreation Facilities May Apply Even To Homes Outside the Subdivision Primarily Served by the Facilities.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Whether the Legislature Complied with Proposition 204’s Directive to Provide Supplemental Funding to the AHCCCS From “Any Other Available Sources” Presents a Political Question Not Appropriate for Judicial Resolution.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That A.R.S. § 25-530 Requires Court to Ignore Service-Related Federal Disability Benefits in Determining Spousal Maintenance Awards.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds, inter alia,That (1) a Party Who Lacks Title When Allegedly Groundless Documents Are Recorded Cannot Assert a Claim as the Owner or Beneficial Title Holder Under A.R.S. § 33-420; and (2) a Party that Records a Quitclaim Deed That Asserts No Particular Interest in the Property and Contains No False Statements May Not Be Held Liable Under A.R.S. § 33-420(C) if the Chain of Title is Sufficiently Confusing Such that the Party Does Not Know Its Claim in the Property is Frivolous or Groundless.
Arizona Court of Appeals Holds That Arizona's Highway Beautification Act Prohibits Electronic Billboards With Changing Advertisements Because They Display “Intermittent” Light.
Supreme Court of Arizona (en banc) Holds That The Recording of An Assignment of Deed of Trust Is Not Required Under A.R.S. § 33-808 Prior to the Filing of A Notice of Trustee’s Sale When The Assignee Holds A Promissory Note Payable to Bearer.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A.R.S. § 37-527 Violates Article 10, Section 7 of the Arizona Constitution By Depriving the Trust Beneficiaries of the Most Substantial Support Possible and Full Benefit of the Grant.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That, for a Mechanic’s Lien to be Valid, the Description Contained in the Twenty-Day Notice Required by A.R.S. § 33-992.01(C) Must be Sufficient to Allow a Stranger to the Transaction to Identify Both What the Lien Claimant Has Provided and to Which Specific Property Any Future Lien Will Attach.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes, and granted review in 5 cases.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That the Successful Party Is Not Entitled to an Award of Costs of Preparing Juror Notebooks That Were Encouraged But Not Required by Order of the Trial Court.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Affirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Plaintiffs in Action to Quiet Title to Easements Against Neighbors.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Constitutional and Statutory Provisions Governing Recall of Public Officers Will Be Liberally Interpreted to Protect the Public’s Right to Recall Officials and That a Substantial Compliance Standard Applies to Recall Petitions .
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Duquette v. Superior Court, 161 Ariz. 269, 778 P.2d 634 (App. 1989), Does Not Apply to Treating Physicians Who Are Employees of a Corporate Defendant That is Itself a Defendant in a Medical Malpractice Action.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Probate Code Bars Complaint Not Filed Within Sixty Days of Notice of Disallowance of Claim, Despite That Two Year Statutory Period to Assert Claim Has Not Lapsed.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Res Judicata Does Not Apply to a Non-Protestable Request for Determination of Benefits.
President Obama Nominates Former Osborn Maledon Partner Justice Andrew David Hurwitz to Serve on the United States Court of Appeals.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Proof of Non-Use of An Easement Is Insufficient To Prove Abandonment of the Easement.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Construction Lien Is Valid Despite Technical Deficiencies in Preliminary 20-Day Notice.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes, and granted review in two cases.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Municipality Has No Obligation To Provide Utility Services to an Unincorporated Parcel If It Has No Statutory or Contractual Obligation To Do So.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That The Uninsured Motorist Act Does Not Require an Insurer to Offer Uninsured Motorist Coverage under a Commercial General Liability Policy That Also Includes Automobile Liability Coverage.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That a Post-Judgment Order Is Not Appealable if It Is Merely Preparatory to Another Later Order or Proceeding and Has No Immediate Effect on the Parties’ Rights and Responsibilities.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Failure to Have an Anomalous Endorsement Does not Create a Presumption That the Person Signing the Instrument is Not an Accommodation Party Under the U.C.C.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An Agency Decision Ordering Further Action From the Parties To Resolve the Merits of A Dispute Does Not “Terminate The Proceeding” and Is Thus Not Subject to Judicial Review.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes, and granted review in 2 cases.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Trustees ARE Natural Persons Holding Legal Title Under A.R.S. § 33-1002, Which Protects Owner-Occupants from Certain Mechanics Liens.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Courts Must Utilize the Six Factors Set Forth in Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 187 to Determine Whether a Trustee Abused Its Discretion.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That A Private Party May Not Acquire a Prescriptive Easement Over a Railway.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Defendant Alleging Non-Party at Fault May Rely on Plaintiff’s Expert Witness Affidavits to Establish Prima Facie Case of Non-Party’s Medical Malpractice.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Vacates Injunction Barring Enforcement of Statutes Affecting Abortion Services.
Arizona Court of Appeals Divison One Holds That Despite Change In Federal Law, Arizona Law Governing The Issuance of A Preliminary Injunction Remains That The Requesting Party Must Show That Irreparable Harm is Possible.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The County Does Not Owe a Duty to Patient After Release From Involuntary Inpatient Treatment.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Plaintiff Need Not Sell or Transfer a Damaged Vehicle to Establish a Claim for Diminution in Value or to Prove the Amount of Loss in Value.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That ADES’s Failure To Strictly Comply With A.R.S. § 8-822.3 Does Not Justify Releasing A Child From Temporary Custody Without First Inquiring Into The Child’s Well Being.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act’s Prohibition Against Deceptive Acts or Practices Only Requires the State to Establish the Minimal Intent That the Defendant Acted Voluntarily.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An Employee Separated from Employment After Stating She May Quit Is Eligible for Unemployment Benefits.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Property Purchasers Who Pay Off an Existing Encumbrance as Part of the Purchase Price Are Entitled to Succeed to the Priority Rights of the Creditor Whose Encumbrance They Paid.
Public Asked for Input on Candidates for Arizona Court of Appeals.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Only Residents of an Active Management Area Have Standing to Object to an Assured Water Supply Determination.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Trial Court Abused Its Discretion in Imposing Sanctions Over a Reasonable Subpoena and Assertion of the Attorney-Client Privilege.
Arizona Court of Appeals Divison One Holds That Deeds of Trust Are Not Negotiable Instruments Under The U.C.C.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Comparative Fault Principles Set Forth in A.R.S. § 12-2506 Do Not Apply to Damages on Breach of Contract Claims.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Purchaser of a Tax Lien Who Sends Notice of the Purchaser’s Intent to Foreclose the Property Owner’s Right to Redeem to an Address at Which the Property Owner No Longer Lives Has Not Complied With A.R.S. § 42-18202(A).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Its Previous Opinion Declaring Deed Restrictions Invalid and Unenforceable Applies to All Lots Within the Affected Subdivisions, Not Just the Lots Whose Owners Participated in the Litigation.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Voluntary Action by Defendant to Moot Pending Request for Mandamus Relief Does Not Preclude Award of Attorneys’ Fees Pursuant to Mandamus Fee-Award Statute A.R.S. § 12-2030.
Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An Employee Who Loses Teeth In An Industrial Accident May Recover Permanent Partial Disability Benefits Without Proving Disfiguration.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Thirty-Day Provision in A.R.S. § 23-942(A) is Not Jurisdictional.
In a Split Decision, The Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Holders of Tribal Office Do Not Hold “Public Office” Within The Meaning of Article 4, Part 2, Section 1 of The Arizona Constitution And Are Thus Not Prohibited From Serving As Commissioners on the Independent Redistricting Commission.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That An Attorney May Serve as a City Mayor.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That A.R.S. § 12-552, the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects, Is Not Subject to Equitable Tolling During the Period Between the Filing of a Putative Class Action and the Denial of Class Certification.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Superior Court’s Failure to Provide Contemporaneous Notice of Placing Case on Inactive Calendar May Be Considered as a Factor in Determining Rule 60(c) Motion for Relief from Judgment of Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Mental Health Facilities Owe a Care of Duty to Patients Seeking Mental Health Services.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That A Notice of Appeal Filed in the Absence of a Final Judgment, or While a Time-Extending Motion Is Pending, Is a Nullity Requiring Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Rule of Merger Applies to Leases and Evidence of Contrary Intent May Preclude a Finding of Merger.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Claimant May Not Appeal to the Superior Court From a Procedural Ruling in a Workers’ Compensation Proceeding.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That (1) a Party Claiming Entitlement to Fees and Costs Under a Contractual Provision Must Plead and Prove Its Claim in the Trial Court; (2) Prejudgment Interest Is Appropriate as of the Date the Amount of the Claim Can Be Readily Calculated; (3) the Trial Court Does Not Abuse Its Discretion in Awarding Fees to a Party under A.R.S. § 12-341.01 When That Party Received a Monetary Judgment and the Court Reduced the Amount of Requested Fees to Reflect the Unsuccessful Counterclaim; (4) the Amount of the “Judgment Finally Obtained” for Purposes of Awarding Attorneys’ Fees and Costs under § 12-341.01 Includes the Amount of a Verdict Plus Any Additional Amounts Included in the Final Judgment, Such as Taxable Costs and Prejudgment Interest; and (5) for Purposes of Rule 68 Sanctions, a Trial Court Must Determine Whether Taxable Costs and Attorneys’ Fees Forming Part of a Judgment Were Reasonably Incurred as of the Date the Rule 68 Offer.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Motion to Dismiss Tort Claim for Insufficiency of Process Is Improper Collateral Attack on Probate Registrar’s Appointment of Special Administrator to Accept Service On Behalf of Estate.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Laborer May Assert Mechanics’ Lien Claims Against Owners of Subdivision Lots Even Though the Laborer Contracted With The Subdivision’s Developer. The Court Also Holds That The Land Owner Has The Burden To Prove The Existence of A Statutory “Cessation of Labor” Which Would Invalidate A Lien, That a Claimant May Record Corrections To an Already-Recorded Lien, And That A Lis Pendens Recorded In Connection With a Mechanics’ Lien Need Not Be Notarized.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That (1) an Arbitration Clause in a Construction Contract Is Void or Voidable When the Contractor Did Not Possess a Contractor’s License, and (2) an Arbitration Is Not an “Action” for Purposes Awarding Attorneys’ Fees and Costs under A.R.S. §§ 12-341 and 12-341.01.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Adopts the Doctrine of Replacement of Mortgages to Hold That when a Senior Lien Is Refinanced by the Same Lender, the New Lien Retains the Same Priority as Its Predecessor, Except to the Extent That Any Change in Terms Is Materially Prejudicial to a Junior Lienholder’s Interest.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Victims’ Bill of Rights Does Not Preclude the Deposition of a Crime Victim by a Party Who Is Not the Defendant, the Defendant’s Attorney, or Another Person Acting on Behalf of the Defendant.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One A Jury May Award Zero Damages To The Plaintiff in A Wrongful Death Suit Even When The Defendant Does Not Contest The Plaintiff’s Testimony.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Mother Cannot Use Her Unauthorized Conduct in Removing Children from Home State and Defying Court Orders Regarding Children’s Custody and Parenting Time to Defeat Home State Jurisdiction.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Damages Claims Arising from Zoning Decisions Do Not Ripen, and the Statute of Limitations Does Not Accrue, Until the Plaintiff Exhausts Administrative Remedies, but That Declaratory Judgment Claims May Be Brought Before Damages Claims Ripen, and the Statute of Limitations Does Not Run Until Administrative Remedies Have Been Exhausted.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Notice of Claim Filed With the State’s Agent, Rather Than the State Attorney General, Does Not Comply With A.R.S. § 12-821.01(A).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An HOA’s Assessment Lien Is Subordinate To A First Deed of Trust And That Counsel For An HOA Committed A Fraud On The Court By Concealing The Existence of a Superior First Deed of Trust.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Expertise of a Party to an Arms-Length Commercial Transaction Does not Create a Fiduciary Relationship Obligating That Party to Act for the Other Party’s Benefit.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Students Injured by Automobile While Waiting to Board a School Bus Are Entitled to Underinsured Motorist Coverage Under School District’s Automobile Insurance Policy.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Municipalities Have No Duty To Provide Public Utility Services To Nonresidents Absent A Statutory Requirement or Contractual Undertaking.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Under A.R.S. § 12-2604(A) an Expert Need Not Have Been Board-Certified at the Time of an Occurrence to Testify About the Standard of Care Applicable to a Board-Certified Defendant.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Failure to Raise a Contractor’s Lack of Licensure as an Affirmative Defense Under A.R.S. § 32-1153 in Arbitration Constitutes a Waiver of That Defense.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Wages Earned By Member of Public Safety Personnel Retirement System May Only Contribute To the Member’s Pension If The Wages Are Related To the Member’s Regular Assignment To Hazardous Duty.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Municipal Annexations That Are Timely Challenged In Court Do Not Automatically Become Final After 30 Days.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Firefighters and Peace Officers Are Required to Prove a General Causal Connection Between Their Disease and Employment to Qualify for Workers’ Compensation Benefits Pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-901.01(B).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Right to Bring a Wrongful Death Action is a Legal Incident of the Parent-Child Relationship That is Lost Upon Adoption.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Federal Law Requires New Owners of Foreclosed Real Property to Give a 90-Day Notice that Tenants Must Vacate, Not Merely a 90-Day Delay Before Filing a Forcible Entry and Detainer Action.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Employers Cannot Be Vicariously Liable for Actions of Employees Traveling To and From Job Even When Employer Requires Employee to Use Own Vehicle For Work.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Court May Grant Relief Under Rule 59(g) Only to the Moving Party.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A.R.S. § 12-2102(C) Requires a Party to File a Post-Verdict Rule 50(b) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law in Order to Challenge on Appeal the Sufficiency of the Evidence to Support a Jury Verdict.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that Breach of Implied Warranty Claim May Be Brought Against Design Professional and “Very Likely” Sounds in Contract, Despite Lack of Privity.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Landowner Does Not Owe a Licensee a Duty of Reasonable Care After the Licensee Leaves the Property.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Corporation Commission Acted Within Its Plenary Ratemaking Authority in Enacting the REST Rules and Approving an APS Surcharge.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Tucson’s City Charter Supersedes Conflicting State Statute Concerning Procedures for Electing City Council Members.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Later-Recorded First Deeds of Trust are Superior to Planned Community Association Assessment Liens.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes today, and granted review in 2 cases.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds that School District Employees Who Do Not Possess a Teaching Certificate May Not Participate in Teacher Merit Pay Compensation System.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Superior Court’s Determination, Later Reversed on Appeal, That There Is No Coverage Under An Insurance Policy Does Not Establish That The Coverage Question Was “Fairly Debatable.” In Addition, When An Insurer Seeks A Declaratory Judgment Regarding Coverage, The Insurer Is Not Absolved of Its Obligation To Reasonably Investigate and Fairly Handle The Insured’s Claim.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That The Family-Purpose Doctrine Is Still Valid in Arizona.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Representation By A Non-Arizona Attorney In Arbitration Is Not Grounds To Vacate An Arbitration Award.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Courts May Not Enjoin Future Public Records Requests Unless a Public Entity Specifically Shows That There Is a Public Interest Sufficient to Overcome the Presumption Favoring Disclosure of Public Records.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds Plaintiffs May Substitute Real Party In Interest Without Showing Initial Failure to Name Proper Party Resulted From Understandable Mistake or Difficulty Identifying Proper Party.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Affirms Summary Judgment Against Plaintiff Who Sued Clinic for Medical Malpractice Claiming Damages Resulting from Plaintiff’s Commission of Homicide and Attempted Suicide.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That a Testator’s Failure to Create a List of Final Instructions That was to be Attached to Her Will Did Not Invalidate the Testamentary Intent With Which She Created the Will.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The Election of Remedies Defense Created by A.R.S. § 23-1024(B) May be Waived if Not Asserted Before a Determination of Compensability has Become Final.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a)(1)(ii) Requires a Party Seeking an Entry of Default to Notify an Attorney Who is Known to Be Representing a Party in the Dispute at Issue in the Litigation, Regardless of Whether That Attorney has Formally Appeared or Otherwise Shown Any Particular Intention to Appear in the Litigation in the Future.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Insurer is Not Required to Show that Insured Rejected in Writing Underinsured Motorist (UIM) Coverage to Deny UIM Benefits Under A.R.S. ¶ 20-259.01(B).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The State Must Serve a Notice of Pending Forfeiture on an Owner or Other Person Claiming an Interest in Seized Property Before That Property May Be Forfeited.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes today, and granted review in 3 cases.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Three Separate Transmissions Made From One State to Another are Interstate Telecommunications Services Under A.R.S. § 42-5064(E)(4).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Upholds Constitutionality of Statutory Expert Witness Requirements at A.R.S. § 12-2604 for Medical Malpractice Actions.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That When AHCCCS Pays for Medical Expenses of a Tort Victim, AHCCCS’s Lien Rights Under A.R.S. § 36-2915 Are Limited To That Portion of a Tort Settlement That Represents Recovery of Medical Expenses Actually Paid by AHCCCS.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 77 Permits Supplemental Disclosure Within 80 Days of Filing an Appeal From Compulsory Arbitration, Without Requiring a Showing of Good Cause.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That The A.R.S. § 1134 Requires That the Actual Owner of Real Property File a Notice of Claim Before Filing an Action Under A.R.S. § 12-1134.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Prosecutor Must Convey to the Grand Jury Some Detail Regarding the Defendant’s Proposed Testimony As Well As a Defendant’s Request to Testify.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Four Defendants Who Hit and Kicked Plaintiffs Who Were Laying Motionless on the Ground Can Be Held Jointly Liable for Injuries Under A.R.S. § 12-2506(D)(1).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Arizona Courts Have No Personal Jurisdiction Over Spouses of Out-of-State Defendants When the Foreign State’s Marital Property Laws Are Not Analogous To Community Property.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Trial Court May Not Weigh Witness Credibility or Conflicting Evidence In Ruling on a Motion for Judgment As a Matter of Law, But May Do So In Deciding whether to Grant of a Motion for New Trial.
The Arizona Supreme Court issued its minutes today, and granted review in 5 cases.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That A.R.S. § 20-259.01 Does Not Require Insurers to Provide an Insured Who Speaks Spanish With a Spanish-Language Form Offering Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Coverage.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An Insured and Insurer Cannot Join in a Morris Agreement That Avoids the Primary Insurer’s Obligation to Pay Policy Limits and Passes Liability in Excess of Those Limits on to Other Insurers.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That Right to Recover for Injuries Sustained Before Age Eighteen Belong to Both the Parent and the Injured Child, Though Double Recovery is Barred.
Arizona Supreme Court Holds That A Single Test Governs Whether a Court May Exercise Personal Jurisdiction over an Out-of-State Defendant, Regardless of Whether the Plaintiff Has Asserted Tort Claims, Contract Claims, or Both.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Multiple Dominant Estate Holders Sharing Use of a Common Easement Must Equitably Contribute to the Costs Necessary to Maintain and Repair the Easement.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A Party Defending Against a Quiet Title Claim Has Not Brought an “Action” and Therefore Cannot Recover Attorneys’ Fees Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1103(B).
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That A.R.S. § 12-2203, Which Adopted the Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony, Violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That A.R.S. § 48-3613(D) Requires Courts to Issue an Order to Remove an Obstruction and Restore a Watercourse to its Original State if Compliance With the Statute and Authorization From the Board Cannot Be Achieved.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That An Order Dismissing Without Prejudice And Granting Leave To Re-File After the Statute of Limitations Had Run Was an Appealable Order; Defendants’ Failure To Appeal Precluded Reconsideration of the Decision To Allow Re-Filing.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Tort Recovery For Agricultural Seeds Destroyed By Defective Growth Media.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Reverses Award of Attorneys’ Fees Because Actions for Breach of a Fiduciary Duty Implied by Law, Fraudulent Conveyance, and Accounting Do Not “Aris[e] Out of a Contract” Within the Meaning of A.R.S. § 12-341.01.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Under Rule 4.1(m), Service Is “Impracticable” and Warrants an Order for Alternate Service if It Would Be “Extremely Difficult or Inconvenient” to Effectuate.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Constructive Knowledge is Sufficient for the Waiver of a Contractual Right to Arbitration.

References: § 14
 § 25
 § 33
 § 33
 § 33
 § 37
 § 33
 v. 
 § 33
 § 187
 § 8
 § 12
 § 42
 § 12
 § 23
 § 12
 § 12
 § 12
 § 12
 § 12
 § 32
 § 23
 § 12
 § 23
 § 42
 § 12
 § 36
 § 1134
 § 12
 § 12
 § 20
 § 12
 § 12
 § 48
 § 12