Tucson Telco Federal Credit Union v. Bowser
Decision Date | 17 August 1967 |
Docket Number | No. 2,CA-CIV,2 |
Citation | 431 P.2d 85,6 Ariz.App. 190 |
Parties | TUCSON TELCO FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, an Arizona corporation, Appellant, v. Daniel L. BOWSER and Mary Bowser, husband and wife, Appellees. 421. |
Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Ray F. Harris, Tucson, for appellant.
William L. Berlat and Michael M. Moore, Tucson, for appellees.
The appellant has filed a motion for rehearing in this case requesting this court to reverse its decision dismissing this appeal and to reinstate same. Appellant contends that this court's conclusion that the judgment appealed from was not an appealable judgment was erroneous since it falls within the category of either A.R.S. § 12--2101, subsec. B or A.R.S. § 12--2101, subsec. G which provide for an appeal from:
Since Rule 56(c), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure 16 A.R.S., clearly denominates a summary judgment on the issue of liability as being interlocutory in character, the subject summary judgment does not fall within the purview of subsection B which pertains to Final judgments. However, appellant's argument relative to the applicability of subsection G merits consideration. It is contended that the adjudication of appellant's liability 'determined the rights of the parties,' leaving only the matter of the amount of recovery (damages) to be determined by another proceeding (trial by jury).
We agree that this subsection of A.R.S. § 12--2101, together with subsections H and I were intended to afford review to a litigant, aggrieved by an interlocutory judgment which In substance has finality. Otherwise, any benefit from a reversal might be lost if entry of final judgment in the case were necessary before obtaining review of the interlocutory judgment.
However, the interlocutory judgment must be one which Determines the rights of the parties. The appellees (plaintiffs below) sought to recover damages for the alleged wrongful conversion of their automobile by the appellant. The summary judgment determined that appellant had wrongfully repossessed the auto because of failure to comply with the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act. Appellees, however, were seeking both compensatory damages and punitive damages....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Musa v. Adrian
...Ariz.App. 163, 547 P.2d 15 (1976); Tucson Telco Federal Credit Union v. Bowser, 6 Ariz.App. 10, 429 P.2d 502, as supplemented 6 Ariz.App. 190, 431 P.2d 85 (1967); Bolon v. Pennington, 3 Ariz.App. 433, 415 P.2d 148 In Cook, it was held that a partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintif......
-
Cook v. Cook
...of the parties.' Tucson Telco Federal Credit Union v. Bowser, 6 Ariz.App. 10, 429 P.2d 502, opn. supp., rehearing denied, 6 Ariz.App. 190, 431 P.2d 85 (1967), also decided by Division 2, involved an alleged wrongful repossession of an automobile. Partial summary judgment had been entered fo......
-
Cordova v. City of Tucson
...Furthermore, it does not qualify as an appealable 'interlocutory judgment' as set forth in subsection G. Tucson Telco Federal Credit Union v. Bowser, 6 Ariz.App. 190, 431 P.2d 85 (1967). We hold, therefore, that this appeal is In so holding, we do not mean to intimate that judicial relief a......
-
Rogers v. Salt River Project Agr. Imp. and Power Dist., 11151
...Furthermore, it does not qualify as an appealable 'interlocutory judgment' as set forth in subsection G. Tucson Telco Federal Credit Union v. Bowser, 6 Ariz.App. 190, 431 P.2d 85 (1967). We hold, therefore, that this appeal is premature.' Cordova v. City of Tucson, 15 Ariz.App. 469, 470--47......