Legal Opinion

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Superior Court

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 23, 1993No. 1 CA-SA 93-0237PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NOYES, Judge.

Montgomery Ward and General Tire (Defendants) filed this special action after the trial court resolved a discovery dispute by granting Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Defendants’ Answer for violation of Rule 26.1, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule). We have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated (A.R.S.) section 12-120.-21(A)(4). We accepted jurisdiction because Defendants have no speedy and adequate remedy by appeal and because this is a matter of statewide importance. See Jones v. Buchanan, - Ariz. -, - P.2d -, 146 Ariz.Adv.Rep. 52, 52 (App. Aug.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Birds International Corp. v. Arizona Maintenance Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
  2. Robinson v. HigueraCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988
  3. Nesmith v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
  4. Lenze v. Synthes, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
  5. Copeland v. Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum & Exposition CenterCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Zimmerman v. ShakmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  2. Marquez v. OrtegaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  3. Wayne Cook Enterprises, Inc. v. Fain Properties Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  4. Rivers v. SolleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
  5. Little v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010

16 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