Legal Opinion

State v. Boykin

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 16, 1973No. 2 CA-CIV 1271PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KRUCKER, Chief Judge.

This special action challenges the lower court’s denial of a motion to dismiss the respondents’ complaint, attacking the sufficiency of the complaint to state a claim for relief. Since an order denying a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory nonappealable order, appellate intervention at this juncture is appropriate to prevent the trial court from proceeding when no cause of action exists. Industrial Commission v. Superior Court, 5 Ariz.App. 100, 423 P.2d 375 (1967).

Accepting the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint as true, as is our duty, we find the following…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. City of Phoenix v. YatesArizona Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Industrial Commission v. Superior Court in and for County of PimaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
  3. Jarvis v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Town of Holbrook v. GirandArizona Supreme Court · 1938
  5. County of Greenlee v. WebsterArizona Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. BoykinArizona Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Gilbert v. County of MohaveCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API