Legal Opinion

Defenders of Wildlife v. Hull

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided February 13, 2001No. 1 CA-CV 99-0624PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PATTERSON, Judge.

¶ 1 Defenders of Wildlife (Wildlife) and the State of Arizona appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Phelps Dodge Corporation, Salt River Valley Users Association, and Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (Salt River), which upheld the validity and application of Senate Bill (S.B.) 1126. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment and remand for entry of summary judgment in favor of Wildlife and the state on their claim that S.B. 1126 is a violation of Arizona’s gift clause…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene Tribe of IdahoSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Block v. North Dakota Ex Rel. Board of University & School LandsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Kaiser Aetna v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. The Daniel BallSupreme Court of the United States · 1871

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Flood Control DistrictCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  2. Dillon v. Zeneca Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  3. Robson Ranch Mountains, L.L. C. v. Pinal CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  4. In re the Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court · 2001
  5. United States v. Torres-RomeroCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008

14 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