Court of Appeals of Arizona· 9/22/1983
Phil W. Morris Co. v. Schwartz
Citations
- 673 P.2d 28
- 138 Ariz. 90
- 1983 Ariz. App. LEXIS 570
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- calling it the “better policy” to disallow affidavits submitted after a decision on a motion for summary judgment where they do not include newly discovered material and could have been produced earlier through reasonable diligence
- \better policy\ to disallow affidavits submitted after a decision on a motion for summary judgment that do not include newly discovered material and could have been produced earlier through reasonable diligence
- after granting summary judgment, trial court acts within its discretion in rejecting new evidence presented in motion for reconsideration absent showing additional facts could not have been discovered and produced earlier with exercise of reasonable diligence
- after granting summary judgment, trial court acts within its discretion in rejecting new evidence presented in motion for reconsideration absent showing additional facts could not have been discovered and produced earlier with exercise of reasonable diligence
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Schmidt, Jacobson, McFate
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Tilley v. DelciCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2009-01-29· cited 73×
- Wells Fargo Credit Corp. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1990-03-20· cited 34×
- Wright v. HillsCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1989-03-09· cited 18×
- Heuisler v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1991-03-05· cited 17×
- Boy v. Fremont Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1987-05-26· cited 14×
- Holland v. HurleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2009-05-19· cited 1×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court· 1955-11-08· cited 181×
- Engelhard Industries, Inc. v. Research Instrumental CorporationNinth Circuit· 1963-12-23· cited 96×
- Sato v. Van DenburghArizona Supreme Court· 1979-06-28· cited 79×
- James Alvado v. General Motors CorporationSecond Circuit· 1956-02-08· cited 56×
- Garrett v. ShannonCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1970-11-10· cited 16×
- Citizens Valley Bank v. MuellerCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1983-05-11· cited 12×
- 7-G Ranching Company v. StitesCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1966-10-25· cited 10×
- Cohen v. Sahuaro Petroleum & Asphalt Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-05-05· cited 8×
- Chemical Foundation, Inc. v. Universal-Cyclops Steel Corp.W.D. Pennsylvania· 1942-04-02· cited 6×
- Gangadean v. LEUMI FINANCIAL CORPORATIONCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1970-12-31· cited 3×
- Channel Marketing, Inc. v. Telepro Industries, Inc.S.D. New York· 1968-07-29· cited 3×
- Campbell v. KingArizona Supreme Court· 1950-10-16· cited 2×
- Thomas v. PoffCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 1980-03-26· cited 2×
- Empire MacHinery Corp. v. Industrial Cab Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-12-27· cited 1×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.