Clerk of the Court banner
HomeAZ Supreme Court > Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court > Agendas and Cases

Agendas and Cases before the Court
 
Notice: Cases are listed until the issuance of the Clerk's mandate.

While the Clerk's Office maintains quality control measures on the information posted, some errors may occur. All posted information is subject to change or amendment.


Agendas

Tuesday, May 3, 2022 (Part 1 of 2) - Petitions for Review
Tuesday, May 3, 2022 (Part 2 of 2) - Petitions for Review
Tuesday, May 3, 2022 - Motions

Cases
 
Case Title Case No. Additional Information
4QTKIDZ LLC et al v HNT Holdings LLC/Beth Ford CV-21-0065-PR Oral Argument held on 2/15/2022

Case Summary

Consolidated Petition for Review granted on 12/7/2021

Memorandum Decision from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case Nos. 2 CA-CV 19-0187, 2 CA-CV 19-0188 and 2 CA-CV 19-0190
AZ Free Enterprise Club et al v Katie Hobbs et al CV-21-0304-AP/EL Oral Argument to be held on 4/19/2022

Case Summary
Lavelle Bridges v Nationstar Mortgage LLC CV-21-0024-PR Oral Argument held on 11/23/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to these rephrased issues on 8/24/2021: 1. Did recording a notice of trustee sale accelerate the debt here as a matter of law? 2. Was the limitations period here tolled?

Opinion issued on issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CV 19-0556
 
Robert Burns v Arizona Public Service Co et al CV-21-0080-PR Oral Argument held on 3/8/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to Issues #1 and #2 only on 12/7/2021

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CV 19-0183
Cal-Am Properties Inc v Edais Engineering Inc CV-21-0129-PR Oral Argument held on 1/13/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 10/5/2021

Memorandum Decision from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CV 20-0279
Matthew Cavallo et al v Phoenix Health Plans Inc CV-21-0051-PR Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased on 3/1/2022: “Were the jury instructions on contract waiver and mitigation of damages proper in this bad faith tort case?”

Opinion issued by the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No.  1 CA-CV-20-0167
Graeme Hancock v Hon. O’Neil/State Bar of Arizona CV-21-0145-SA Oral Argument held on 4/12/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Special Action accepted over this rephrased issue on 1/4/2022: Whether and to what extent issue preclusion applies in bar disciplinary proceedings.
Harris/Heartmedia v Hon. Randall Warner/McCarthy CV-21-0242-PR Oral Argument to be held on 4/14/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 1/4/2022
Oyt Jackson v ICA/First Transit et al CV-21-0127-PR Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted on 9/14/2021

Memorandum Decision issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA IC-20-0013
Kizzen James et al v City of Peoria et al CV-21-0125-PR Oral Argument held on 1/11/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased on 9/14/2021:

“Is a notice of claim invalid under A.R.S. § 12-821.01(E) if it provides that the claimant’s settlement offer will terminate in less than sixty days after the notice is served?”

Memorandum Decision issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA CV-20-0415
Maarten Kalway v Calabria Ranch HOA LLC et al CV-20-0152-PR

Oral Argument issued on 3/22/2022

 

Oral Argument held on 2/18/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 12/15/2020

Memorandum Decision from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, No. 2 CA CV-19-0106

Kristi Lattin v Shamrock Materials LLC et al CV-21-0031-PR Opinion issued on 2/3/2022

Oral Argument held on 12/14/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased on 9/14/2021:

“Under A.R.S. § 25-215(D), is a defendant required to join the plaintiff’s spouse in order to obtain a judgment for attorney fees that’s enforceable against the plaintiff’s community property?”

Memorandum Decision issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA CV-20-0245
Timothy Matthews v ICA/City of Tucson/Tristar CV-21-0192-PR Oral Argument to be held on 4/19/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased on 2/8/2022:  Is A.R.S. § 23-1043.01(B) unconstitutional as applied to claimants who work in high-stress occupations such as law enforcement?

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-IC 20-0001
Ronnie McDaniel et al v Payson Healthcare et al CV-20-0333-PR Oral Argument held on 9/21/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as rephrased to these two issues on 5/4/2021:

1. Did the Court of Appeals err as a matter of law in using a de novo standard of review, and ruling that the treating physicians’ testimony constituted independent expert “standard of care” testimony that violated Rule 26(b)(4)(F), Ariz. R. Civ. P., the “one-expert-per-side rule?"

2. Did the Court of Appeals err in determining that it lacked jurisdiction to review the trial court’s ruling denying a motion to name a former defendant as a nonparty at fault because the former defendant was an indispensable party in the appeal?

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, No. 2 CA-CV 19-0150
Gred Mills et al v ABTR et al CV-21-0203-PR Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted on 3/1/2022

Memorandum Decision issued by the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No.  1 CA-CV-20-0510
Morgan/Neff v Hons. Dickerson/Cardinal/State CV-21-0198-PR Oral Argument to be held on 4/19/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 2/8/2022

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case Nos. 2 CA-SA 21-0007 and 2 CA-SA 21-0019
Clinton Roberts et al v State CV-21-0077-PR Oral Argument held on 12/14/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 9/14/2021

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA CV-20-0060
Jorge Romero-Millan et al v William Barr CV-20-0128-CQ Oral Argument held on 3/11/2021

Case Summary

Jurisdiction accepted on 12/21/2020
Wendy Rogers et al v Hon. Mroz/Pamela Young et al CV-21-0001-PR Opinion issued on 2/1/2022

Oral Argument held on 9/28/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 5/4/2021

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA-SA 19-0262
Hani W Saba v Sawsan Khoury CV-21-0023-PR Oral Argument held on 10/7/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to Issue 1 only on 8/24/2021

Opinion issued on issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CV 19-0609 FC
South Point Energy Center LLC v Ador et al CV-21-0130-PR Oral Argument held on 2/15/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 12/7/2021

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-TX 20-0004

Southern Arizona Home Builders v Town of Marana

CV-21-0211-PR

Oral Argument not yet scheduled

 

Case Summary not yet available

 

Petition for Review granted on 4/5/2022

 

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-CV 20-0087

Staker & Parson Companies v Scottsdale Insurance Co CV-21-0256-CQ Oral Argument to be held on 4/14/2022

Case Summary

Certified Question accepted on 1/4/2022
State v Hon. Aragon/Max Fontes CR-20-0304-PR

Opinion issued on 3/21/2022

 

Oral Argument held on 9/21/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as rephrased to these two issues on 5/4/2021: 1. Did the court of appeals err by accepting special action jurisdiction? 2. If not, did the court of appeals err by defining the “event” in a superseding cause defense as defendant’s conduct and finding foreseeability as a matter of law where the defendant’s conduct “event” increased the risk of harm to the victim, thereby eliminating the defense of superseding cause?

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, No. 2 CA-SA 20-0031

State v Hons. Brearcliffe/Vasquez et al CV-21-0174-SA Oral Argument held on 2/10/2022

Case Summary not yet available

Jurisdiction accepted on 11/2/2021
State v Bayron Perez Agueda CR-21-0097-PR Oral Argument held on 10/7/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 8/24/2021

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CR 20-0020
State v Sammantha Lucille Rebecca Allen CR-17-0368-AP Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available
State et al v AZ Board of Regents et al CV-21-0134-PR

Opinion issued on 4/5/2022

 

Oral Argument held on 12/16/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to these issues as rephrased on 9/14/2021:

1. Was the Attorney General Office’s public-monies claim under §35-212 (count IV) timely? 2. Did the Attorney General’s Office have statutory authority to bring the claims set forth in counts I through III of its amended complaint?

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division One, No. 1 CA TX-20-0003

State v Donald Delahanty CR-18-0341-PC Oral Argument held on 1/11/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this issue only as rephrased on 9/14/2021:

“Did petitioner state a colorable claim for post-conviction relief under Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), for the prosecution’s failure to correct false testimony from witness Armendariz that he did not have an agreement with the prosecution concerning his testimony?”
State v Scott Lee Deshaw CR-21-0400-PR

Oral Argument not yet scheduled

 

Case Summary not yet available

 

Petition for Review granted as to Issue one only on 4/5/2022

State v Jordan Christopher Ewer CR-21-0059-PR Oral Argument held on 1/25/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this rephrased issue on 11/2/2021: Whether a jury instruction on the justification defense of self-defense may incorporate the use of force by both the defendant and the victim as suggested by the language of A.R.S. sec. 13-404(A) or refer only to the defendant as set forth in RAJI Ch. 4.

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-CR 19-0162
State v Sergio Fierro Jr CR-20-0435-PR Oral Argument held on 11/16/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to these rephrased issues on 8/24/2021: 1. How should trial courts instruct juries on attempted second-degree murder? 2. Did the trial court’s fundamental error in instructing the jury on attempted second-degree murder prejudice the defendant?

Memorandum Decision issued from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-CR 19-0161
State v Beau John Greene CR-21-0082-PC Oral Argument held on 3/8/2022

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 1/4/2022
State v Bryan Mitchell Lietzau  CR-19-0132-PR Oral Argument held on 2/18/2020

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 11/19/2019

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, No. 2 CA-CR 18-0011
State v Nicolas Luviano CR-21-0329-PR Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased on 3/1/2022: “What standard governs whether a statute describes a single unified offense or separate offenses, and how does that apply in this case?”

Opinion issued by the Court of Appeals, Division 2, Case No. 2 CA-CR 19-0102
State v Rahim Muhammad CR-21-0073-PR Oral Argument held on 11/16/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this rephrased issue on 8/24/2021: When a defendant’s competency has been put in issue, is the trial court required to make a specific finding of heightened competency before it can find the defendant has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to a jury trial?

Opinion issued from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-CR 19-0307
State v Bobby Charles Purcell CR-21-0398-PR

Oral Argument not yet scheduled

 

Case Summary not yet available

 

Petition for Review granted as to Issue one only on 4/5/2022

State v Dwandarrius Jamar Robinson CR-18-0284-AP Oral Argument held on 1/13/2022

Case Summary
State v Preston Alton Strong CR-17-0201-AP Oral Argument held on 5/5/2020

Case Summary

State v Kenneth Wayne Thompson II

CR-19-0141-AP Opinion issued on 1/19/2022

Oral Argument held on 12/14/2021

Case Summary
Swift Transportation Co of AZ v Hon. Carman et al CV-20-0119-PR Oral Argument held on 11/19/2020

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted on 8/25/2020
TFLTC LLC v Beth Ford CV-21-0133-PR
Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this issue as rephrased:  Does the holding of Leveraged Land Co. v. Hodges, 226 Ariz. 382 (2011) strictly limit recovery of a plaintiff’s attorney fees and costs in a tax lien foreclosure action under A.R.S. § 42-18201 to only those incurred before the date of redemption, or can a plaintiff recover reasonable attorney fees and costs that were incurred after redemption when those fees were incurred as part of the legal action to which A.R.S. § 42-18206 refers?

Memorandum Decision from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case Nos. 2 CA-CV-2020-0122 et al
Melissa Varela v FCA US LLC et al CV-20-0157-PR Opinion issued on 3/1/2022

Oral Argument held on 3/16/2021

Case Summary

Petition for Review granted as to this rephrased issue on 1/5/2021: “Does the implied obstacle preemption doctrine apply under the facts here to preclude Plaintiff’s claims?”

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No. 1 CA-CV 19-0209
Gerald Walker et al v Auto-Owners Insurance Comp CV-21-0236-CQ Oral Argument held on 4/12/2022

Case Summary

Certified Question accepted on 1/4/2022
Aranzi Rae Jon Willis v Hon. Bernini/State CR-21-0258-PR Oral Argument to be held on 2/10/2022

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted as to these rephrased issues on 11/2/2021: 1. Is “clearly exculpatory evidence” defined by the standard set forth in Herrell v. Sargeant, 189 Ariz. 627 (1997) or Trebus v. Davis, 189 Ariz. 621, 623 (1997)? 2. Did the trial court commit error by denying defendant’s motion for remand to the grand jury?
Antoinette Windhurst v ADOC et al CV-21-0288-PR

Oral Argument not yet scheduled

 

Case Summary not yet available

 

Petition for Review granted on 4/5/2022

 

Opinion from the Court of Appeals, Division Two, Case No. 2 CA-CV 20-0162

Tina Zambrano v M & RC II LLC et al CV-21-0205-PR Oral Argument not yet scheduled

Case Summary not yet available

Petition for Review granted on 3/1/2022

Opinion issued by the Court of Appeals, Division One, Case No.  1 CA-CV-19-0635