Kroncke v. City of Phoenix

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE ROBERT EARL KRONCKE, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) CITY OF PHOENIX; MARVIN A. ) SONDAG; JUDITH A. TOWNSEND; ) MARCO LING; JOHN JUSLIN; SAM ) DELILLO; BRUCE BORCHERT; WILLIAM ) CRISWELL; PETER VAN HAREN, ) ) Defendants-Appellees. ) __________________________________) This matter came on for 1 CA-CV 09-0335 DIVISION ONE FILED: 03-23-2010 PHILIP G. URRY,CLERK BY: DN DEPARTMENT D Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV 2008-020850 D E C I S I O N O R D E R conference on March 17, 2010, before Presiding Judge Patricia A. Orozco and Judges Diane M. Johnsen and Maurice Portley participating. lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We determine that we See Sorensen v. Farmers Ins. Co., 191 Ariz. 464, 465, 957 P.2d 1007, 1008 (App. 1997) (this court has an independent duty to determine whether it has appellate jurisdiction). Robert Earl Kroncke ( Appellant ) appeals from the superior court s order dismissing the City of Phoenix as a defendant in this case. required That order does not include an express determination by Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) for establishing the order s finality when other claims are pending. 1 CA-CV 09-0335 Page Two Here, claims against the individually-named defendants remain unadjudicated. The order from which Appellant seeks relief is therefore not a final judgment, and we consequently do not have jurisdiction over this appeal. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12- 2101(B) (2003) (only final judgments may be appealed); Pulaski v. Perkins, 127 Ariz. 216, 217, 619 P.2d 488, 489 (App. 1980). IT IS ORDERED dismissing this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. /s/ ____________________________ PATRICIA A. OROZCO PRESIDING JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.