Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
S082726
|
People v. Mackey
Order |
|
May 11, 2000 | ||
S086591
|
County of Riverside v. Superior Court (Madrigal)
Review granted |
|
May 11, 2000 | ||
F028505
|
People v. Mackey
In determining validity of defendant's prior conviction, jury can also consider other official documents directly related to prior conviction. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 11, 2000 | |
S068325
|
Erlich v. Menezes
Homeowners are entitled to recover damages from contractor for emotional distress, physical pain, and lost wages. |
Torts |
|
May 11, 2000 | |
99-3034
|
Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies v. Miles, Wright, Finley, & Zak (In re McColm)
Only district court has jurisdiction to hear appeals from bankruptcy court involving final judgments, orders and decrees and interlocutory orders and decreees. |
Bankruptcy |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
98-6135
|
Woolward v. JLG Industries Inc.
Court may not exclude amount received by plaintiff from settlement agreement when calculating prejudgment interest. |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-0258
|
Forest Guardians v. Wells
Arizona State Land Department properly denies grazing lease application where applicants intend to prevent grazing to promote conservation. |
Government |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-0202
|
Sheree M., a Minor
Juvenile court abuses its discrestion when it places incorrigible juvenile on juvenile intensive probation supervision. |
Juveniles |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-0016
|
City of Tucson v. Tucson Hotel Equity Limited Partnership
Hotel profits from selling interstate long distance telecommunication service to guests, are not taxable under telecommunication services statute in Arizona. |
Taxation |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-4138
|
Martinez v. Pacificorp
Order |
Employment Law |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-5120
|
U.S. v. Rodriguez-Moreno
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-0562
|
State v. Paleo
Prosecutor's race neutral explanation for peremptory challenge is not enough to disprove discriminatory motive. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
98-0232
|
Hislop v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District
Under Arizona law, co-worker and friend of negligently injured person cannot recover for emotional distress suffered from witnessing injury to that person. |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-4004
|
U.S. v. Saldana-Duarte
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-6141
|
Oliver v. State of Oklahoma
Order |
Civil Rights |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-3224
|
U.S. v. Segraves
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-1265
|
Keil-Koss v. Cigna
Order |
Employment Law |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-3266
|
U.S. v. Lee
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-6238
|
Woodward v. Beaver
Order |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-6369
|
U.S. v. Fox
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-0431
|
Johnson v. Pankratz
Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages for non-physical injuries arising from battery, and need not prove specific dollar amount. |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-7118
|
Cox v. Kaiser
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-1478
|
Garner v. Pugh
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
99-4219
|
U.S. v. Leon-Munoz
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
98-50293
|
United States v. Nesenblatt
The federal Sentencing Guidelines permit enhancement of sentence based upon amount of money obtained from offense. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
S057491
|
Ervais v. Glauber
Review granted |
|
May 10, 2000 | ||
B105675
|
Erlich v. Menezes
Homeowners are entitled to recover damages from contractor for emotional distress, physical pain, and lost wages. |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
C024045
|
Etcheverry v. Tri-Ag Service Inc.
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act doesn't pre-empt failure to warn claims. |
Torts |
|
May 10, 2000 | |
S064321
|
Jones v. City of Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board
Order |
|
May 9, 2000 | ||
98-1167
|
Christensen v. Harris County
Public employer may force employees to use or lose accrued compensatory time. |
Labor Law |
|
May 9, 2000 |