Legal Opinion · Dissent

Florez v. Sargeant

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided May 16, 1996No. CV-94-0454-PR, CV-94-0495-PRPublished

1DissentFeldman, Chief Justice

I respectfully dissent from the court’s opinion for three reasons:

1. These are not the “rare, extraordinary cases” in which this court’s intervention by special action is justified but simply cases presenting routine legal issues in which such relief from this court “is almost always inappropriate.” Opinion at 524, 917 P.2d at 253.

2. The opinion incorrectly characterizes both the facts presented in the cross-motions for summary judgment and the issues raised in this court.

3. Beginning with an incorrect picture of the facts and issues, the court inevitably misapplies the law.

A. Special action…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Orme School v. ReevesArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Fuenning v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF MARICOPAArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Phillips v. CalhounCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
  4. State v. LindseyArizona Supreme Court · 1986
  5. J.R. Maffei Richard Maffei Betty J. Maffei v. Northern Insurance Company of New York Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993

29 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