Affiliations

• Donaldson v. Tucson Gas, Electric Light & Power Co.

  District Court, D. Arizona · 1935-11-27 · cited 5×

  The case involves a negligence claim by plaintiff Donaldson against Tucson Gas, Electric Light & Power Co. and its electrical department superintendent Russell V. Sanford for injuries allegedly caused by failure to comply with Arizona Corporation Commission safety regulations (General Order No. 37, adopting the National Electric Safety Code) in maintaining electrical equipment. The defendant company sought removal to federal court, arguing that the joinder of Sanford was fraudulent to defeat diversity jurisdiction because the complaint alleged only nonfeasance for which an employee is not liable to third parties, creating a separable controversy. The court held that Arizona law (Rev. Code §729) imposes a statutory duty on corporate officers and employees that can give rise to civil liability for violations, making a joint cause of action possible, and that the joinder was not a sham; therefore the case must be remanded to state court as it does not present a removable separable controversy.

  proceduretorts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (2,048 words)

• United States v. Shultz

  District Court, D. Arizona · 1933-04-11 · cited 3×

  This case involved multiple defendants charged with violations of federal Prohibition laws for operating stills in private dwellings, who moved to suppress evidence seized during warrantless entries by prohibition officers. The court granted the suppression motions in the Shultz, Mendoza, Burns, and Mills cases but denied the motion in the McGuire case. The core reasoning centered on whether the officers had sufficient probable cause based on odors or observations to justify arrests or searches without warrants under statutes like 27 USCA § 39, which limits searches of private homes, and whether any offenses occurred in the officers' presence prior to entry. The court found that most entries involved impermissible searches preceding valid arrests or lacked adequate justification, while the McGuire search was upheld because officers detected mash odors and activity outside the premises before entering.

  criminal lawprocedure

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (4,673 words)

• In Re Menzies

  District Court, D. Arizona · 1932-06-29 · cited 6×

  In this bankruptcy case, landlords petitioned for return of a tenant's personal property on leased premises to satisfy their statutory lien for unpaid rent after the tenant's voluntary petition was filed in 1931. The court addressed whether the lien was subject to bankruptcy administration costs and priorities under Section 64 of the Bankruptcy Act, and whether the trustee could accept the landlords' bid for the property in full satisfaction of the lien. The court held that the landlords' lien is paramount and not governed by the priority provisions of Sections 64a and 64b, as it is a valid pre-existing statutory lien preserved under Section 67d. The reasoning relied on Arizona law creating a landlord's lien that attaches at the tenancy's start and is unaffected by bankruptcy, along with precedents distinguishing such liens from unsecured claims subject to administration expenses. The court further ruled that the trustee could abandon burdensome property to the secured creditors if its value was insufficient to benefit the estate.

  propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (2,021 words)