Pima County v. Hogan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under § 12-1128(A), a court has broad discretion to award costs among the parties, and therefore may, but need not, award costs to a party who rejected an offer of judgment and did no better after a trial. Rule 68, however, mandates the shifting of costs to the offeror under such circumstances and would require it here. Further, although this case does not involve an institution covered by § 12-1128(C), we agree with the trial court that applying Rule 68 to condemnation eases could yield incongruous results. Given the direct conflict between the statute and rule, it appears they cannot be harmonized. Thus, we must decide which of the two applies to eminent domain proceedings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Miller Park, L.L.C.

2. “[c]osts may be allowed or not, and if allowed may be apportioned between the parties on the same or adverse sides, in the discretion of the court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. SALT RIVER PROJ. AGRIC. IMP. AND POWER DIST. v. Miller Park, LLC