Legal Opinion

Pipher v. Loo

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided March 10, 2009No. 1 CA-CV 08-0143PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

IRVINE, Judge.

¶ 1 Plaintiff-Appellant Mark R. Pipher appeals from a jury verdict in favor of Defendants-Appellees Kent C. Loo, D.D.S. and Jane Doe Loo on his claim for medical malpractice. Pipher argues the trial court made erroneous and prejudicial evidentiary rulings at trial and challenges the court’s award of sanctions to the Loos pursuant to Rule 68, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Because we find that the trial court erred in its evidentiary rulings and we vacate and remand, we also vacate the court’s Rule 68 award.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶ 2 On July 29, 2002, Pipher…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. BoltonArizona Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & YoungArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Logerquist v. McVeyArizona Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Gosewisch v. American Honda Motor Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Yauch v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2000

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. McMurtry v. Weatherford Hotel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  2. Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. Jaynes v. McConnellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  4. State of Arizona v. Manuel Jesus PesqueiraCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  5. In re the Marriage of FriedmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API