Legal Opinion

Callan v. Bernini

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided March 22, 2006No. 2 CA-SA 2005-0085PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ESPINOSA, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Petitioners Robert Callan, the City of Tucson, and various employees of the City and their spouses (collectively, Callan) seek special action relief from the respondent judge’s denial of their motion for summary judgment in the negligence action brought against them by real parties in interest, Luis and Cynthia Pimber. In the motion, relying on A.R.S. § 23-1022(D) and an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between the City of Tucson and other governmental entities, Cal-lan argued the superior court lacked subject matter jurisdiction of the complaint because…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. State v. ChappleArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Hayes v. Continental InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Mail Boxes v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Bothell v. Two Point Acres, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  5. Twin City Fire Insurance v. BurkeArizona Supreme Court · 2003

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Grosvenor Holdings, L.C. v. FigueroaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  2. Stein v. Sonus USA, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  3. Rand v. Porsche Financial ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. Green v. NygaardCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  5. McKee v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016

8 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