ARNOLD v. VAN ORNUM

1 CA-CIV 212.

4 Ariz. App. 89 (1966)

417 P.2d 723

Thurman L. ARNOLD and Gertrude M. Arnold, his wife, Appellants, v. Effie H. VAN ORNUM, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Arizona.

September 7, 1966.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wade Church, Phoenix, for appellants.

Favour & Quail, by Joseph De Pasquale, Prescott, for appellee.


CAMERON, Judge.

Plaintiffs' complaint was dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Rule 41(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, 16 A.R.S. From an order denying plaintiffs' motion to set aside the dismissal made pursuant to Rule 60(c), Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, 16 A.R.S., plaintiffs bring this appeal.

We are called upon to determine if the trial court abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs' motion to set aside the dismissal.

...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases