Legal Opinion

City of Sedona v. Devol

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided August 26, 1999No. 1 CA-CV 97-0594PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FIDEL, Judge.

¶ 1 A governmental body that initiates and abandons condemnation proceedings must, under certain circumstances, pay its adversary’s attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. (“A.R.S.”) § 11-972(A). A governmental body that initiates or abandons such proceedings in bad faith must pay its adversary’s fees and costs pursuant to the common law established in State ex rel. Morrison v. Helm, 86 Ariz. 275, 282, 345 P.2d 202, 206 (1959).

¶ 2 We consider in this appeal an assertion that the City of Sedona abandoned proceedings against appellants when, as part of a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. HelmArizona Supreme Court · 1959
  2. County of Kern v. GalatasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  3. City of Phoenix v. McCulloughCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
  4. City of Phoenix v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Whitestone v. Town of South TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. FKM Partnership, Ltd. v. Board of RegentsTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  2. City of Casa Grande v. Arizona Water Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
  3. Orsett/Columbia Ltd. Partnership v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  4. Arizona Republican Party v. RicherCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2023
  5. Arizona Republican Party v. RicherCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2023

4 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