Legal Opinion

Tena v. Yorgulez

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided August 6, 1975No. 2 CA-CIV 1821PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KRUCKER, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered for defendants-appellees after the trial court, sitting as the trier of fact, dismissed plaintiffs-appellants’ complaint on the merits pursuant to Rule 41(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, 16 A.R.S. The sole question presented is whether appellants’ action to recover fractional interests in a parcel of realty was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, A.R.S. § 12-523.

We note preliminarily that despite appellants’ timely request, the trial court failed to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. We stated in Lappin v.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Arthur Silva v. George Romney, and Harry Wolk, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973
  2. Rossiter v. VogelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
  3. Shellman v. ShellmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
  4. Kubby v. Crescent SteelArizona Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Aldena English, and Huntington Township Committee on Human Relations v. Town of HuntingtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Jones v. BurkCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
  2. Chandler v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
  3. Matter of Estate of MesserCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
  4. Brnilovich v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API