Legal Opinion
State ex rel. Napolitano v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided April 13, 2000No. CV-99-0444-T/APPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZLAKET, Chief Justice.
¶ 1 We are asked to decide whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to intervene filed nearly two and one-half years after this litigation began, and fifteen days after a consent decree and final judgment were entered. We hold that it did not.
¶ 2 On August 20, 1996, the State of Arizona and the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) (“the State”) filed suit against the tobacco industry and its trade associations (“the tobacco companies”) seeking damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief. The State alleged, among…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- 16 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1089, 16 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8164 Maria Alaniz v. Tillie Lewis Foods, Robert Beaver, Applicant-IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
- Banco Popular De Puerto Rico v. David Greenblatt, the Official Secured Creditors' Committee of Amfesco Industries, Inc., Etc., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Winner Enterprises, Ltd. v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988
- Aleut Corp. v. Tyonek Native Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Romley v. MartinArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- Godoy v. HantmanArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- Arnold v. Commonwealth, ex rel. ChandlerKentucky Supreme Court · 2001
- Heritage v. WeinbergCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
- State v. HatchCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.