Falcon Ex Rel. Sandoval v. Maricopa County

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Board of Supervisors is the proper entity to serve under Rule 4.1
• holding that strict compliance with the notice 8 statute is required
• holding that delivering notice to a single member of a county 11 board of supervisors did not provide notice to the remaining members of the board because 12 they were not authorized to accept service for the remaining members
• noting that a claim against a government entity is barred “[i]f a notice of claim is not properly filed within the statutory time limit”
• noting that the county clerk is authorized to accept service on the county’s behalf
• holding delivery of notice of claim to one member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who was not authorized to accept service for the county, was insufficient to establish service on the Board

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).