Legal Opinion
Matter of Estate of Kopely
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided November 10, 1988No. 2 CA-CV 88-0141PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LACAGNINA, Chief Judge., Mazen Fahoum appeals the probate court’s order finding that his claim for personal injuries made against the estate of Lillian J. Kopely was not timely filed and is forever barred. He argues that the issue of timeliness was previously resolved in the underlying tort case and that A.R.S. §§ 14-3801 and 3803 are unconstitutional. Because we agree that the provisions are unconstitutional, we vacate the order and remand with directions.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On January 1,1986, Lillian J. Kopely was driving her vehicle and turned left in front of Fahoum’s…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mennonite Board of Missions v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. PopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Di Orio v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
- Taylor v. BettsArizona Supreme Court · 1942
- Pacific Greyhound Lines v. BrooksArizona Supreme Court · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Matter of Estate of WeidmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
- Martel v. StaffordSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
- Stewart v. TraversCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
- Barry & Sewall Industrial Supply Co. v. Estate of BarryCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- In Re HillDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.