Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
5 opinions for “Brame v. Scottsdale, City of”
In Re Guardianship of A.K.public domain
IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE In the Matter of the Guardianship of: A.K., A Minor/Real Party in Interest. No. 1 CA-CV 23-0485 FILED 08-27-2024 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JG512607 The Honorable Amanda S. Chua, Judge Pro Tempore (retired
Murray v. Murraypublic domain
OPINION JOHNSEN, Judge: ¶ 1 We hold in this ease that a statutory requirement under which a parent generally must wait a year to ask to change legal decision-making or parenting time applies to a request to relocate that implicates decision-making or parenting time. We also hold that Arizona Rule of Evidence 408 does not preclude evidence of negotiations
Dynometrics v. ades/enriquezpublic domain
IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE DYNOMETRICS INC., Appellant, v. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY, an agency, and JULIE ENRIQUEZ, Appellees. No. 1 CA-UB 22-0042 FILED 3-19-2024 Appeal from the A.D.E.S.
FILED Jul 14 2025, 9:45 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals
Bennett v. Taylorpublic domain
505 F.Supp. 800 (1980) Mrs. William T. BENNETT et al. v. W. T. TAYLOR et al. Civ. A. No. 78-417-A. United States District Court, M. D. Louisiana. December 31, 1980. *801 *802 J. Arthur Smith, III, Smith & Osborne, Baton Rouge, for plaintiffs. Sharon F. Lyles, Executive Asst. Gen. Co