Legal Opinion

Havasupai Tribe of the Havasupai Reservation v. Arizona Board of Regents

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 28, 2008No. 1 CA-CV 07-0454, 1 CA-CV 07-0801PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOHNSEN, Judge.

¶ 1 Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases1 brought claims against the Aizona Board of Regents (“ABOR”) and others arising out of the alleged misuse of blood samples taken from members of the Havasupai Tribe in the early 1990s. In each case, the superior court entered summary judgment against the plaintiffs because it concluded they failed to comply with A-izona’s notice-of-claim statute, Aizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 12-821.01 (2003). Asked to apply the statute’s requirement that a claimant provide “facts supporting” the stated settlement demand, we reverse…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Janson v. ChristensenArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Zamora v. ReinsteinArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  3. United Services Automobile Ass'n v. MorrisArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Doe v. RoeArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Deer Valley Unified School District No. 97 v. HouserArizona Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Backus v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 2009
  2. McKee v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
  3. Flood Control District v. Paloma Investment Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  4. Humphrey v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020
  5. Stearns v. Arizona Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012

8 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