Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mathieu v. Mahoney

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 1993No. CV-92-0364-APPublished

1DissentFeldman, Chief Justice

The majority today explains its previous order that the Arizona League of Women Voters was guilty of laches in its attempt to keep Proposition 110 off the ballot, so that its request for an injunction should have been denied by the trial court. I dissented from the previous order, and I dissent from the present opinion explaining that order.

As the majority acknowledges, the affirmative defense of laches exists only when the. evidence shows that the delay is “ ‘unreasonable under the circumstances ... and ... the delay has resulted in prejudice to the other party sufficient to justify denial…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kerby v. LuhrsArizona Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Tilson v. MoffordArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  3. State Ex Rel. Jones v. LockhartArizona Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Slayton v. ShumwayArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Lakin Cattle Company v. EngelthalerArizona Supreme Court · 1966

4 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