Madsen v. Fendler
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CAMERON, Justice.
Robert H. Fendler appeals from the trial court’s judgment dismissing his cross-claims and denying his motion to file a third-party complaint. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 19(e), Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, 17A A.R.S.
Although Fendler raises three questions on appeal, the answer to one will be dispositive of the matter and that is: May a party to an administrative hearing enlarge the parties and the cause of action on appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to the Administrative Review Act, A.R.S. § 12-901, et seq.?
The facts necessary for a resolution of this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pioche Mines Consol., Inc. v. Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Higgins v. Shenango Pottery Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1951
- Custred v. Jefferson Cty.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1978
- Roer v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
3Cited by12 opinions
- Grosvenor Holdings, L.C. v. FigueroaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- SVENDSEN v. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- Berry v. Arizona State Land DepartmentArizona Supreme Court · 1982
- Arizona Department of Revenue v. Navopache Electric Co-Op, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
- Globe Air, Inc. v. ThurstonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.