You are here


Email Updates - Click here to subscribe for automatic notices when this page is updated.

The District of Arizona offers a database of opinions for the years 2012 to current, listed by year and judge.

Judicial opinions from the District of Arizona, as well as other participating courts from throughout the nation, can also be accessed through the U.S. Government Publishing Office's United States Courts Opinions web page. To view judicial opinions on the GPO’s website, click here.

Date Description Judgesort descending
07/25/05 Croston Et Al V. Davis Et Al (2:05-ap-00153-CGC) 07/25/05

Under Advisement Decision re: Motion to Dismiss

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
08/28/09 Rosemary Stewart (2:09-bk-09022-CGC) 08/28/09

Under Advisement Decision Re: Motion to Lift Stay

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
11/05/09 Willetta Llc (2:09-bk-11977-CGC) 11/05/09

Under Advisement Decision Re: Motion for Relief from Stay

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
01/13/05 International Surfacing, Inc. (2:96-bk-05142-CGC) 01/13/05

Under Advisement Decision re: Joint Motion for Reconsideration of Finova Capital Corporation and Trustee Joseph J. Janas

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
07/31/06 Rfi Realty, Inc. (2:04-bk-10486-CGC) 07/31/06

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law re: Sale Order

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
07/13/05 Clelland Et Al V. Moak (2:03-ap-01071-CGC) 07/13/05

Memorandum Decision re: Motion for Summary Judgment

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
03/07/12 Mountainside Fitness Centers Of Gilbert, L.L.C. And Thomas John Hatten (2:10-bk-23734-CGC) 03/07/12

Under Advisement Decision Regarding Grasser Investments, LLC's Standing to File a Proof of Claim

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
12/27/12 Namwest, LLC et al v. Namwest-Town Lakes, LLC et al (2:08-ap-00860-CGC) 12/27/12

Holding: Although the Court has the discretion to grant attorneys’ fees because the claims arose out of contract, the Court denies the Namwest Parties’ applications for attorneys’ fees. The Kohan Parties’ factually complex claims had merit. The $640,000 fees requested would create an extreme hardship that would discourage others who believe they have oral contracts from bringing tenable claims. Furthermore, the fees requested are unreasonable, and the Court cannot determine if they are directly tied to the claims.

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
10/16/04 Ardria Louise Lacefield (2:03-bk-22470-CGC) 10/16/04

Under Advisement Decision re: Trustee's Motion to Alter or Amend Order

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)
05/29/07 College Properties Ltd. (2:05-bk-10095-CGC) 05/29/07

Under Advisement Decision re: First and Final Fee Application of Altfeld Battaile & Goldman, P.C.

Judge Charles G. Case II (retired)