Legal Opinion

Hmielewski v. Maricopa County

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 4, 1998No. 1 CA-CV 96-0421PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARBARINO, Judge.

¶ 1 The attorneys for the plaintiffs and a defendant in the underlying medical malpractice action appeal from sanctions imposed against them for conducting what the trial court characterized as a secret “sham” trial. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2 This appeal arises out of a medical malpractice action. Cheryl Anne Newcomb was admitted to Scottsdale- Memorial Hospital for inducement of labor to deliver her first child. Mrs. Newcomb suffered complications, including massive bleeding, from which she died…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Damron v. SledgeArizona Supreme Court · 1969
  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. PaynterCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
  5. City of Tucson v. GallagherArizona Supreme Court · 1972

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  2. In Re AlcornArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Flood Control District v. Paloma Investment Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  4. Stafford v. BurnsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017
  5. Kaufmann v. CruikshankCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009

11 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