Johnson v. SUPERIOR COURT, PIMA COUNTY
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1DissentFernandez, Judge
I concur in the trial court’s determination that timely and proper notice to the public entity satisfies the requirements of the new claims statute, A.R.S. § 12-821(A).
The previous state claims statute was intended to give the state notice and an opportunity to investigate its liability, to explore the possibility of settlement, and to assist in the budgeting process. State v. Brooks, 23 Ariz.App. 463, 534 P.2d 271 (1975). Those purposes are implicit in the current statute. In addition to the notice, settlement and fiscal considerations implicit in the statute, the legislature expressly…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Stone v. Arizona Highway CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1963
- Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. HelmeArizona Supreme Court · 1987
- Darling v. Augusta Mental Health InstituteSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1987
- State v. Superior Court of Maricopa CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1979
- Lutz v. SemcerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.