Legal Opinion

Thiele v. City of Phoenix

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided April 2, 2013No. 1 CA-CV 11-0769PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GEMMILL, Judge.

¶ 1 Appellant James Thiele challenges the constitutionality of Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 67(d), which requires the trial court to order a plaintiff to provide security for costs on a showing that he does not own property within the state that could satisfy the defendant’s claim for costs in the litigation. We hold that subsections (d) and (e) of Rule 67, when considered together, are facially constitutional. We further conclude, however, that the trial court erred in dismissing the action on the basis of Thiele’s failure to post a cost bond, because the amount of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Eastin v. BroomfieldArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Grant v. Arizona Public Service Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Ritchie v. KrasnerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  4. Sweis v. ChatwinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
  5. Baltayan v. Estate of GetemyanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Melinda S. Workman v. Verde Wellness Center, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
  2. State v. BurkeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  3. Brighthouse Life Insurance Company v. Lawrence RudolphDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API