ELM RETIREMENT CENTER, LP v. Callaway

How courts have described this case

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

• stating a court does not err in denying a motion to amend if the amendment would be futile
• “[B]ecause specific contract provisions express the 16 parties’ intent more precisely than general provisions, specific provisions qualify the 17 meaning of general provisions.”
• “[A] tort claim accrues when a plaintiff knows or with reasonable diligence should know of the defendant’s wrongful conduct.” (cleaned up)
• “[E]ach part of a contract must be read together, to bring harmony, if 9 possible, between all parts of the writing.”
• “To determine the parties’ intent, we ‘look to the plain meaning of the words as viewed in the context of the contract as a whole.’” (quoting United Cal. Bank v. Prudential Ins. Co., 681 P.2d 390, 411 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).