A.R.S. 12-653.04, 12-653.05
Publication or broadcast of correction prior to demand (12-653.04)
A correction published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in the newspaper or magazine, or on the radio or television broadcasting station, as the statements claimed in the complaint to be libelous, prior to receipt of a demand therefor, shall be of the same force and effect as though the correction had been published or broadcast within three weeks after a demand therefor.
Exception (12-653.05)
The provisions of this article shall not apply to any publication or broadcast made within thirty days preceding any election, if such publication or broadcast is designed to in any way influence the results of such election.
Phoenix Personal Injury Attorneys, Arizona Accident Lawyer
Phoenix Attorney Slip and Fall
Abogado Phoenix Arizona, Lesiones Personales y Accidentes
A.R.S. 12-661
Liabilities of parents or legal guardians for malicious or wilful misconduct of minors
A. Any act of malicious or wilful misconduct of a minor which results in any injury to the person or property of another, to include theft or shoplifting, shall be imputed to the parents or legal guardian having custody or control of the minor whether or not such parents or guardian could have anticipated the misconduct for all purposes of civil damages, and such parents or guardian having custody or control shall be jointly and severally liable with such minor for any actual damages resulting from such malicious or wilful misconduct.
B. The joint and several liability of one or both parents or legal guardian having custody or control of a minor under this section shall not exceed ten thousand dollars for each tort of the minor. The liability imposed by this section is in addition to any liability otherwise imposed by law.
C. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, nothing in this section limits the right of an insurer to exclude coverage for the acts of a minor imputed to his parent or legal guardian pursuant to this section.
Arizona DWI Lawyer, DUI Defense Attorney
A.R.S. 12-671
Drawing check or draft on no account or insufficient account with intent to defraud; civil action; definition of credit; prima facie evidence
A. A person who, for himself or for another, with intent to defraud, makes, draws, utters or delivers to another person or persons a check or draft on a bank or depositary for payment of money, knowing at the time of such making, drawing, uttering or delivery, that he or his principal does not have an account or does not have sufficient funds in, or credit with, such bank or depositary to meet the check or draft in full upon presentation, shall be liable to the holder of such check or draft for twice the amount of such check or draft or fifty dollars, whichever is greater, together with costs and reasonable attorney's fees as allowed by the court on the basis of time and effort expended by such attorney on behalf of plaintiff.
B. The word "credit" as used in this section shall be construed to be an express agreement with the bank or depositary for payment of the check or draft.
C. Proof that, at the time of presentment, the maker, issuer or drawer did not have sufficient funds with the bank or depositary, and that he failed within twelve days after receiving notice of nonpayment or dishonor to pay the check or draft is prima facie evidence of intent to defraud.
D. Where a check, draft or order is protested, on the ground of insufficiency of funds or credit, the notice of formal protest thereof shall be admissible as proof of presentation, nonpayment and protest and shall be prima facie evidence of the insufficiency of funds or credit with the bank or depositary, or person, or firm or corporation.
E. "Notice", as used in this section, means notice given to the person entitled thereto, either in person, or in writing. Such notice in writing shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the person at his address as it appears on such check or draft.
F. Nothing in this section shall be applicable to any criminal case or affect eligibility or terms of probation.
Phoenix Family Law and Divorce Attorney
Phoenix Auto Accident Attorneys
Phoenix Injury and Accident Lawyers
A.R.S. 12-681
Definitions
In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Defective and unreasonably dangerous" does not include a food product that is otherwise fit for human consumption and nourishment.
2. "Food product" means any product that is grown, prepared, provided, served or sold and that is primarily intended for human consumption and nourishment.
3. "Manufacturer" means a person or entity that designs, assembles, fabricates, produces, constructs or otherwise prepares a product or component part of a product before its sale to a user or consumer, including a seller owned in whole or significant part by the manufacturer or a seller owning the manufacturer in whole or significant part.
4. "Product" means the individual product or any component part of the product that is the subject of a product liability action.
5. "Product liability action" means any action brought against a manufacturer or seller of a product for damages for bodily injury, death or property damage caused by or resulting from the manufacture, construction, design, formula, installation, preparation, assembly, testing, packaging, labeling, sale, use or consumption of any product, the failure to warn or protect against a danger or hazard in the use or misuse of the product or the failure to provide proper instructions for the use or consumption of any product.
6. "Product safety analysis or review" means any investigation, inquiry, review, evaluation or other means by which a person or entity seeks to determine, calculate, predict, estimate, evaluate or report the safety or health effects of the use of any of its products, systems, services or processes. Product safety analysis or review includes an analysis or review by a component manufacturer of the safety and health effects of component parts in end products. A product safety analysis or review may be conducted by employees of the person or entity or by consultants engaged specifically to perform the analysis or review.
7. "Reasonable remedial measures" means actions taken as a result of a product safety analysis or review and intended to improve the safety of products, systems, services or processes or to lessen the likelihood of a safety-related accident. These actions include:
(a) Modifications to the product, system, service or process.
(b) Changes in quality assurance procedures or policies.
(c) Modifications made to the design or method of manufacturing, to manufacturing equipment or to the testing of the product, system, service or process.
(d) Changes or additions to training programs or safety education programs.
(e) Personnel or human resources measures related to the product, system, service or process.
(f) The use or modification of warnings, notices or changes to owner manuals and related materials.
(g) The recall of products.
8. "Reasonably foreseeable alteration, modification, use or consumption" means an alteration, modification, use or consumption of the product that would be expected of an ordinary and prudent purchaser, user or consumer and that an ordinary and prudent manufacturer should have anticipated.
9. "Seller" means a person or entity, including a wholesaler, distributor, retailer or lessor, that is engaged in the business of leasing any product or selling any product for resale, use or consumption.
10. "State of the art" means the technical, mechanical and scientific knowledge of manufacturing, designing, testing or labeling the same or similar products that was in existence and reasonably feasible for use at the time of manufacture.