Legal Opinion

Winner Enterprises, Ltd. v. Superior Court

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 22, 1988No. 1 CA-SA 88-176PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JACOBSON, Judge.

This special action arises out of the trial court’s denial of Winner Enterprise’s (Winner) motion to intervene as a party respondent in Ponderosa Car Wash, Inc. v. City of Prescott, Yavapai County Superior cause no. 50811. Winner claims it is the real party in interest and as such is entitled to intervene as a matter of right, pursuant to Rule 24(a)(2), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Respondent real party in interest, Ponderosa Car Wash, Inc. (Ponderosa), does not contest Winner’s interest in the litigation, but claims the application for intervention was untimely…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. Super. Ct. in & for Maricopa Cty.Arizona Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Bechtel v. Rose in and for Maricopa CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1986
  3. McGough v. Ins. Co. of North AmericaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  4. United States F. G. Co. v. Seed L. Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Anderson v. MartinezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  2. Green v. NygaardCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  3. State ex rel. Napolitano v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Arizona Supreme Court · 2000
  4. State Ex Rel. McDougall v. RiddelCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  5. State Ex Rel. Romley v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991

12 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