Legal Opinion
Morgan v. Carillon Investments, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided April 29, 2004No. 1 CA-CV 03-0232PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GEMMILL, Judge.
¶ 1 Alexa Morgan and Nancy Bochner (“Plaintiffs”) appeal from the judgment dismissing their Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award. Their Application was dismissed by the trial court because it was not filed within the ninety-day deadline set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 12-1513(A) (2003). Carillon Investments, Inc. and Michael Simpson (“Defendants”) cross-appeal from the court’s denial of their attorneys’ fees request. Because we decide that the ninety-day limitation in A.R.S. § 12-1513(A) does not apply to Plaintiffs’ Application, we reverse…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Calvert v. Farmers Ins. Co. of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- State v. KorzepArizona Supreme Court · 1990
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. WilsonArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- Cohen v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- NEW SUN BUSINESS PARK, LLC v. Yuma CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- SEMPRE LTD. PARTNERSHIP v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- Gorman v. Pima CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- Morgan v. CARILLON INVESTMENTS, INC.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- Advanced Property Tax Liens, Inc. v. ShermanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.