Legal Opinion
Combs v. Lufkin
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided May 23, 1979No. 2 CA-CIV 2995PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HOWARD, Judge.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment. After granting a motion for mistrial, the trial court invited the appellees to file a motion for summary judgment and then granted it because it hoped it would be appealed and then “maybe we could get a determination of what the issues are in this case . . . .”
It is axiomatic that summary judgment should not be granted where there is a material issue of facts or where there is the slightest doubt as to the material facts. Shea North, Inc. v. Ohio Casualty Insurance Co., 115 Ariz. 296, 564 P.2d 1263 (App.1977); Bendalin v. Valley…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Richards Development Company v. SlighArizona Supreme Court · 1961
- Mecham v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
- Shea North, Inc. v. Ohio Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977
- Bendalin v. Valley National Bank of ArizonaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
- Boone v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Spudnuts, Inc. v. LaneCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
- Floyd v. Jay County Rural Electric Membership Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
- Vairo v. ClaydenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- Overson v. CowleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
- Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.