Legal Opinion

Pompa v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR MARICOPA

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 30, 1997No. 1 CA-SA 96-0300PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RYAN, Judge.

The issue presented here is whether an appellant’s failure to comply with Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated (“AR.S.”) section 13-2314(M)’s requirement of filing a copy of the notice of appeal and brief with the attorney general’s office at the time of filing divests this court of jurisdiction. We hold that the existing appellate procedural rules promulgated by the supreme court pursuant to the Arizona Constitution prevail, and therefore this court has jurisdiction over the appeal.

Petitioner/defendant/appellant Joseph Pompa, d.b.a. LaPerla Cafe (“Pompa” or “defendant”)…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Daou v. HarrisArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. State v. BirminghamArizona Supreme Court · 1964
  3. United States v. Super. Ct. in & for Maricopa Cty.Arizona Supreme Court · 1985
  4. State Ex Rel. Collins v. SeidelArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  5. King v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Martin v. ReinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  2. State Ex Rel. Napolitano v. BrownArizona Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Graf v. WhitakerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  4. Rodriguez v. ArellanoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  5. In Re Property Located at 6757 S. Burcham Ave.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2003

10 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