AzApp Blog Covering Arizona's Appellate Courts

Arizona Supreme Court holds that the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control does not owe a statute-based duty of care to persons injured by drunk drivers.

Arizona Supreme Court holds that a facially valid but forged deed can trigger the five-year statute of limitations under A.R.S. § 12-524.

Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One holds that the Maricopa County Justice Courts’ qualification requirements for pro tem Justice of the Peace applicants are not facially unconstitutional.

The Arizona Supreme Court holds that (1) the term, “in connection with your business,” as defined in Cincinnati Indemnity Company’s automobile insurance policy, requires a covered vehicle to be used by an employee in furtherance of an employer’s business purpose, which does not include a routine commute to or from the employer’s office, and (2) a contingent Morris agreement is enforceable if it meets the substantive requirements of Morris agreements to ensure against fraud, collusion,

Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two, holds that attorneys’ fees in nuisance action are not recoverable even when nuisance is prohibited by terms of CC&Rs.

Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Ones holds that there is no right to a jury in ACC enforcement actions.