Case Name: Joseph F. SANSON and John K. Skomp, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Bennie M. GONZALES and Lupe Gonzales, husband and wife; Jerry Tokoph, Jr., and Gudrun Carmen Tokoph, husband and wife; JERI-CO Contracting, an Arizona corporation; Stewart Mazure and Rosemary Mazure, husband and wife, Defendants-Appellants
Court: Arizona Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Arizona
Decision Date: 1984-09-26
Citations: 141 Ariz. 633
Docket Number: No. 17514-PR
Parties: Joseph F. SANSON and John K. Skomp, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Bennie M. GONZALES and Lupe Gonzales, husband and wife; Jerry Tokoph, Jr., and Gudrun Carmen Tokoph, husband and wife; JERI-CO Contracting, an Arizona corporation; Stewart Ma-zure and Rosemary Mazure, husband and wife, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: HOLOHAN, C.J., GORDON, V.C.J., and HAYS and CAMERON, JJ„ concur.
Reporter: Arizona Reports
Volume: 141
Pages: 633–634

Head Matter:
688 P.2d 641
Joseph F. SANSON and John K. Skomp, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Bennie M. GONZALES and Lupe Gonzales, husband and wife; Jerry Tokoph, Jr., and Gudrun Carmen Tokoph, husband and wife; JERI-CO Contracting, an Arizona corporation; Stewart Ma-zure and Rosemary Mazure, husband and wife, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 17514-PR.
Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc.
Sept. 26, 1984.
Murphy & Posner by K. Bellamy Brown, Richard H. Lee, Gary N. Pederson, Phoenix, for plaintiffs-appellees.
O’Connor, Cavanagh, Anderson, West-over, Killingsworth & Beshears, P.C. by Donald E. Dyekman, Brian C. Bond, Phoenix, for defendants-appellants.

Opinion:
FELDMAN, Justice.
We granted the petition for review in the case at bench because, inter alia, of our disagreement with certain conclusions reached by the court of appeals and a conflict between the opinion of the court of appeals (Sanson v. Gonzales, 142 Ariz. 30, 688 P.2d 676 [App.1984]) and that of Division 2 of the same court in the case of First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Ram, 135 Ariz. 178, 659 P.2d 1323 (1982).
We are advised by counsel that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement. Concluding, therefore, that the issues raised in the petition for review and response thereto are moot, we order that the proceedings be, and they hereby are, dismissed and that the opinion of the court of appeals is vacated.
HOLOHAN, C.J., GORDON, V.C.J., and HAYS and CAMERON, JJ" concur.