JSH Reporter Summer 2014 - Page 7

APPELLATEHIGHLIGHTS 007 OCTOBER 7, 2013 Tucson Unified School District v. Borek (AZ Court of Appeals) Legislature’s use of the word “knew” unambiguously shows its intent to require actual, rather than constructive, knowledge for application of the “propensity exception” to immunity under A.R.S. § 12-820.05(B). MORE INFORMATION: www.apltwo.ct.state.az.us/Decisions/SA20130099%20 Opinion.pdf JSH RESOURCE ALERT! Law Alerts The JSH Law Alert is a periodic publication that reviews recent court decisions. Our May 2014 alert is available by clicking here: http://www.jshfirm.com/publications/ pub_14_051514142751.pdf. To receive a copy of our monthly Law March 21, 2014 Alerts, send an email to marketing@jsh- Timmons v. Ross Dress for Less, Inc. firm.com. Archives of past Law Alerts are (AZ Court of Appeals) available at www.jshfirm.com/publications. Easement holder owes a duty to an invitee who uses the easement for the purpose for which the easement holder has secured it. MORE INFORMATION: www.apltwo.ct.state.az.us/Decisions/CV20130053Opinion.pdf February, 10, 2014 Monroe v. Basis School, Inc. (AZ Court of Appeals) who erroneously advised family their daughter died in an auto accident. MORE INFORMATION: www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2014/ CV%2012-0826.pdf A charter school owes no duty of care to students outside its custody. MORE INFORMATION: www.apltwo.ct.state.az.us/Decisions/ CV20130047OPN.pdf May 13, 2014 Estate of Ethridge v. Recovery Management Systems (AZ Court of Appeals) May 13, 2014 Woodbridge Structured Funding v. Genex (AZ Court of Appeals) A direct interest, not a contingent interest, is required for a party’s intervention in an assignment action. MORE INFORMATION: www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/ Div1/2014/1%20CA-CV%2013-0043.pdf May 6, 2014 Guerra v. State (AZ Court of Appeals) The State was entitled to summary judgment on a negligent training claim where Plaintiff failed to identify what other training should have been provided to DPS officers The plain language of Medicare’s Part C preemption provision shows that Congress expressly preempted all but a very limited number of state laws; Arizona’s anti-subrogation doctrine is not one of those limited exceptions. MORE INFORMATION: www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2014/Amended%20 1%20CA-CV%2012-0740.pdf ABOUT THE AUTHOR JON BARNES Jon Barnes clerked for Judge Orozco at the Arizona Court of Appeals before joining the firm. He currently focuses his practice on state and federal appeals. Email: jbarnes@jshfirm.com