Legal Opinion

Rigney v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR CTY. OF PIMA

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 18, 1972No. 2 CA-CIV 1239PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KRUCKER, Chief Judge.

The petitioner is the plaintiff in a pending lawsuit and via this special action challenges the respondent court’s granting the motion of defendants Puckett to amend their answer and, in accordance therewith, amending the pre-trial order. The sequence of events is as follows.

The plaintiff, while riding as a passenger in a car owned by K & D Construction Company, and driven by Kenneth K. Kam-rath, was injured when the Kamrath vehicle collided with a vehicle driven by Mr. Puckett. She filed suit against the Puck-etts, Kamrath, K & D Construction Company, M. M. Sundt…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kennecott Copper Corporation v. McDowellArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Burrell v. Southern Pacific CompanyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1970
  3. Landers v. MaysOhio Court of Appeals · 1963

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Fleitz v. Van WestrienenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977
  2. Frances McDonald and Joy McDonald v. Nancy Petree and Holly Ann HudspethCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  3. Matusik v. Arizona Public Service Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  4. McDonald v. PetreeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API