Legal Opinion

Barmat v. John & Jane Doe Partners A-D

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 1, 1990No. 2 CA-CV 89-0004, 2 CA-CV 89-0075PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HATHAWAY, Judge.

In this legal malpractice action, appellant Edward Hochuli and his law partners (Hochuli) seek reversal of the trial court’s judgment that a settlement agreed to by plaintiff and other defendants was entered into in good faith. Ariz.R.Civ.P. 16.1, 16 A.R.S. (Rule 16.1) Hochuli also appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying a motion to file a third-party complaint.

The facts leading up to this malpractice action are contained in this court’s opinion in Barmat v. Doe, 155 Ariz. 515, 747 P.2d 1214 (App.1986). Briefly, the law firm of Hazlett & Murphy (Murphy Partners)…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & AssociatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. United Services Automobile Ass'n v. MorrisArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Barmat v. John and Jane Doe Partners ADArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Home Ins. Co. v. Advance MacHine Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  5. Wasmund v. Metropolitan Sanitary DistrictAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dowling v. StapleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  2. Hospital Underwriting Group, Inc. v. Summit Health Ltd., Sarahmarge Crigler, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
  3. Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  4. Dacotah Marketing & Research, L.L.C. v. Versatility, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API