Catalina Foothills Ass'n, Inc. v. White
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BIRDSALL, Judge.
The only issue in this appeal concerns the allowance of attorney fees of $6,000 to the appellees White pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01(A). 1 We affirm.
The plaintiffs-appellants, Catalina Foothills Association, Inc. (CFA) and Herbert and Grace Schmidt, husband and wife, commenced this action seeking to enforce deed restrictions claimed to apply to the appellees’ property. The Schmidts were adjoin ing property owners. The appellees successfully contended that the former restrictions had terminated and therefore they were not prohibited from continuing the use they were…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Autenreith v. NorvilleArizona Supreme Court · 1981
- Amphitheater Public Schools v. EastmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977
- Earven v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1980
- Shirley v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
- Rhodes v. HirschCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Orfaly v. Tucson Symphony SocietyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- Chaurasia v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- Lacer v. Navajo CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- Grand Real Estate, Inc. v. SirignanoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
- Wilcox v. WaldmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.