Dobson v. State Ex Rel App Court Appointments

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that Article III courts are jurisdictionally limited to “cases or controversies,” while Arizona courts are not similarly constrained
• noting that Article III courts are jurisdictionally limited to “cases or controversies,” while Arizona courts are not similarly constrained
• noting that special- action jurisdiction is not appropriate to resolve disputed facts
• “Special action jurisdiction is appropriate here because the petition presents purely legal questions of statewide importance that turn on interpreting Arizona’s Constitution.”
• “Under Arizona’s Constitution, standing is not jurisdictional, but instead is a prudential doctrine . . . .”
• Arizona’s declaratory judgment statute, AR.S. § 12-1832 (2003), implicitly recognizes a person’s right to seek a declaratory judgment when her “rights, status or other legal relations” are affected.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).