Arizona Court of Appeals Division Two Holds That Under A.R.S. § 13-4311(H), a Motion for Summary Judgment Is Not a Responsive Pleading and That the Trial Court Improperly Considered Evidence When It Ruled on a Motion to Dismiss.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That an “Independent Expert” Under Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4)(D) Means a Person Retained for the Purpose of Offering Expert Opinion Testimony.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 77(f) Permits Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs to Co-Defendant, When Defendant Unsuccessfully Seeks to Shift Fault to Co-Defendant at Trial De Novo Following Compulsory Arbitration.
Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That A.R.S. § 11-821(C) and Coconino County Subdivision Ordinance No. 82-3, Section 4.14(A)(2) Allow the County to Exercise Discretion in Deciding When, and Under What Circumstances, It May Call Performance Bonds Posted by a Developer to Ensure Completion of Subdivision Improvements.