Motley v. Simmons

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that without Rule 78(c) certification, the superior court could enter a new judgment that reflected the correct child support obligation
• explaining that Rule 78, as amended, “advises courts, litigants, and attorneys of the two mutually exclusive ways by which they may ensure that a judgment, as defined under Rule 78(a)(1), is appealable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• City of Phoenix v. Geyler
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1985-03-19· cited 203×
• Baker v. Baker
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1995-07-25· cited 184×
• Barassi v. Matison
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1981-10-22· cited 69×
• Forszt v. Rodriguez
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2006-02-15· cited 49×
• Munger Chadwick, P.L.C. v. Farwest Development & Construction of the Southwest, LLC
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-05-07· cited 39×
• Northern Propane Gas Co. v. Kipps
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1980-12-04· cited 38×
• Yee v. Yee
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2021-03-25· cited 30×
• State ex rel. Montgomery v. Mathis
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2012-12-11· cited 21×
• Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Co. v. Romley
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1978-01-27· cited 20×
• Courtney v. Hon. foster/courtney
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-09-18· cited 10×