WALKER BY PIZANO v. Mart
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FELDMAN, Vice Chief Justice.
This case requires us to determine whether Arizona recognizes a cause of action for “wrongful life.” The question was certified to us by the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. See Rule 27(a), Ariz.R. Sup.Ct., 17A A.R.S. Because it raises an important issue of first impression in this state, we accepted jurisdiction. See Rule 27(b), Ariz.R.Sup.Ct, 17A A.R.S. We have jurisdiction pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1861 and Ariz. Const, art. 6, § 5(6). We exercise our discretion in accordance with the principles set forth in…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Becker v. SchwartzNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Markowitz v. Arizona Parks BoardArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1983
- Turpin v. SortiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Felder v. Physiotherapy AssociatesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- Arche v. United StatesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1990
- Kassama v. MagatCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2002
- Tomlinson v. Metropolitan Pediatrics, LLCOregon Supreme Court · 2018
- Willis Ex Rel. Willis v. WuSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.