Legal Opinion

Stonecreek Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Shure

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 26, 2007No. 1 CA-CV 06-0372PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PORTLEY, Judge.

¶ 1 Mavis Shure and Lanny I. Hecker (“Appellants”) appeal from the final judgment in favor of Stonecreek Budding Company and the denial of their motion for new trial. We find that the Prompt Pay Act (“the Act”) was intended to ensure payment to contractors for work acceptably completed and that withholding payment on an invoice which does not charge for any allegedly defective work violates the Act.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶ 2 Appellants entered into a contract with Stonecreek to construct a custom residence. During construction, Appellants complained of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Donnelly Const. Co. v. Oberg/Hunt/GillelandArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Ruiz v. HullArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Donnelly Construction Co. v. Oberg/Hunt/GillelandCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  4. Higginbottom v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  5. Blecick v. School District No. 18 of Cochise CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Grand v. NacchioCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  2. Zumar v. CaymusCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017
  3. GRAND v. NACCHIO McMASTER QWEST COMMUNICATIONSCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  4. SK Builders, Inc. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
  5. Shea v. Az RegistrarCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API