Tena v. Yorgulez
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- Arthur Silva v. George Romney, and Harry Wolk, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973
- Rossiter v. VogelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Shellman v. ShellmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Kubby v. Crescent SteelArizona Supreme Court · 1970
- 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
- Jones v. BurkCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
- Chandler v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
- Matter of Estate of MesserCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
- Brnilovich v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1989