1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 35 P.3d
  5. 35 P.3d 117 (2001)
 

HOHOKAM IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE DIST. v. APS

No. 2 CA-CV 01-0026.

35 P.3d 117 (2001)

201 Ariz. 356

HOHOKAM IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant/Appellee, v. ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Counterclaimant/Appellant. Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. One, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 3, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 4, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 5, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; and Maricopa-Stanfield Irrigation & Drainage District, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Intervenors/Appellees, v. Arizona Public Service Company, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Appellant. The Harquahala Power District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Aguila Irrigation District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; McMullen Valley Water Conservation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Buckeye Water Conservation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Roosevelt Irrigation District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 7, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; and Electrical District No. 8, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Intervenors/Appellees, v. Arizona Public Service Company, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2, Department A.

November 29, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Brown & Bain, P.A., By Paul F. Eckstein and Dan L. Bagatell, Phoenix, for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant/Appellee Hohokam Irrigation.

Osborn Maledon, P.A., By Andrew D. Hurwitz and Warren Stapleton, Phoenix, for Defendant/Counterclaimant/Appellant Arizona Public Service.

Robert S. Lynch, Paul R. Orme, P.C., Phoenix, Mayer, for Pinal County Intervenors/Appellees.

Moyes Storey, By Jay I. Moyes and Steve Wene, Phoenix, for Maricopa County Intervenors/Appellees.

OPINION

FLOREZ, J.

¶ 1 Appellant Arizona Public Service Company (APS) challenges the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of appellees Hohokam Irrigation and Drainage District, the Pinal County Intervenors,1 and the Maricopa County Intervenors.2 APS contends the trial court erred as a matter of law by declaring that Hohokam and the...

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