Court Opinion

ID: 9850029
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:51:12.031464+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:30.586693
License: Public Domain

*407FELDMAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent because I disagree with the last two paragraphs of the opinion. It is true that the specific legal remedy provided by statute is “restoration.” The statement that the justice court therefore lacked equitable power to order destruction of the photographs is a non-sequitur; its effect is contrary to the legislative objective. The statutory authority is contained in A.R.S. 13-3922, which allows the justice court to order “restoration” in the form of a mandatory injunction. If the court has that legal power, it follows that it has equitable power to also order destruction or restoration of the improper photographs even though those were taken of rather than from the appellees.