Legal Opinion
Schilz v. SUPER. CT. IN & FOR MARICOPA CTY.
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided February 7, 1985No. 17528-SAPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOLOHAN, Chief Justice.
Petitioner brings this special action challenging the ruling of the respondent trial judge granting, over petitioner’s objections, full faith and credit to a New Mexico judgment establishing petitioner’s paternity of a certain child. We accepted jurisdiction under Ariz. Const. Art. 6, § 5 and Arizona Rules of Special Actions 4, 17A A.R.S. because petitioner has no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal.
The relevant uncontested facts are that petitioner and Joycelene Osborn were married in Gallup, New Mexico on May 27, 1979 and thereafter moved and lived in…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Kulko v. Superior Court of Cal., City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Smith v. SmithNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- Oyakawa v. GillettCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
- Von Schack v. Von SchackSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2006
- Martin v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
- Anonymous Wife v. Anonymous HusbandArizona Supreme Court · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.