Sanson v. Gonzales

Arizona Supreme Court

Sanson v. Gonzales

688 P.2d 641, 141 Ariz. 633, 1984 Ariz. LEXIS 276

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 26, 1984

DocketNo. 17514-PR

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 688 P.2d 641 (Sanson v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sanson v. Gonzales, 688 P.2d 641, 141 Ariz. 633, 1984 Ariz. LEXIS 276 (Ark. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

FELDMAN, Justice.

We granted the petition for review in the case at bench because, inter alia, of our disagreement with certain conclusions reached by the court of appeals and a conflict between the opinion of the court of appeals (Sanson v. Gonzales, 142 Ariz. 30, 688 P.2d 676 [App.1984]) and that of Division 2 of the same court in the case of First Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Ram, 135 Ariz. 178, 659 P.2d 1323 (1982).

We are advised by counsel that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement. Concluding, therefore, that the issues raised in the petition for review and response thereto are moot, we order that the proceedings be, and they hereby are, dismissed and that the opinion of the court of appeals is vacated.

HOLOHAN, C.J., GORDON, V.C.J., and HAYS and CAMERON, JJ„ concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

FELDMAN, Justice.

We granted the petition for review in the case at bench because, inter alia, of our disagreement with certain conclusions reached by the court of appeals and a conflict between the opinion of the court of appeals (Sanson v. Gonzales, 142 Ariz. 30, 688 P.2d 676 [App.1984]) and that of Division 2 of the same court in the case of First Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Ram, 135 Ariz. 178, 659 P.2d 1323 (1982).

We are advised by counsel that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement. Concluding, therefore, that the issues raised in the petition for review and response thereto are moot, we order that the proceedings be, and they hereby are, dismissed and that the opinion of the court of appeals is vacated.

HOLOHAN, C.J., GORDON, V.C.J., and HAYS and CAMERON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

688 P.2d 641, 141 Ariz. 633, 1984 Ariz. LEXIS 276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanson-v-gonzales-ariz-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack