Legal Opinion
Campbell v. SZL Properties, Ltd.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided February 4, 2003No. 1 CA-CV 01-0050PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALL, Judge.
¶ 1 This case requires us to decide whether a trial court judgment that is vacated pursuant to the parties’ settlement of the case while it is pending on appeal nonetheless retains collateral estoppel effect in a subsequent lawsuit involving one of the original parties. The trial court determined that Jon and Janice Campbell were precluded from relitigating a property boundary dispute that was resolved against them in the vacated judgment and granted summary judgment against them. We conclude that the collateral estoppel doctrine does not apply to judgments that have been…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Harris Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Ringsby Truck Lines, Inc., and Ringsby-Pacific, Ltd. v. Western Conference of TeamstersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Cody Farms, Inc. v. Deerman (In re Deerman)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
- Corbett v. Manorcare of America, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- Calpine Construction Finance Co. v. Arizona Depatment of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Picaso v. Tucson Unified School DistrictArizona Supreme Court · 2007
- Child v. Foxboro Ranch Estates, LLC (In re Child)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.