Scottsdale Insurance v. Cendejas
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WEISBERG, Judge.
¶ 1 Anthony Cendejas, Pamela Sue Cende-jas, and Topa, Inc. (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the superior court’s grant of summary judgment to Scottsdale Insurance Company (“SIC”) after the court found that Appellants had not timely complied with the requirements of Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 26(b)(5) regarding their notice of nonparty at fault. Appellants also challenge the court’s calculation of prejudgment interest. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the ruling regarding the notice of a nonparty at fault and thus SIC’s entitlement to summary…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Janson v. ChristensenArizona Supreme Court · 1991
- Devenir Associates v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1991
- John C. Lincoln Hospital v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- Kocher v. Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
- Alta Vista Plaza, Ltd. v. Insulation Specialists Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Flood Control District v. Paloma Investment Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- Aqua Management, Inc. v. AbdeenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- Bowen Productions, Inc. v. FrenchCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
- State ex rel. Arizona Structural Pest Control Commission v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- Sirrah Enterprises, LLC v. WunderlichCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.