# Natale v. Natale

> Court of Appeals of Arizona · April 16, 2014 · 234 Ariz. 507

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9799355

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re the Marriage of Arlene NATALE, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Paul NATALE, Respondent/Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arizona
- **Decided:** April 16, 2014
- **Citations:** 234 Ariz. 507; 684 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 14; 323 P.3d 1158; 2014 Ariz. App. LEXIS 62
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cattani
- **Judges:** Gemmill, Coui'T, Pi'Esiding, Portley, Cattani
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9799355

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that without 2 MORENO v. BELTRAN Opinion of the Court ARFLP 78(b) language, an order that does not resolve all pending claims is not final or appealable
- noting "a family court ruling is not final and appealable until all of the claims pending before the court have been resolved" or until the court has issued a "certification of finality" under Rule 78(b)

## Opinion text

CATTANI, J.,
specially concurring.
¶21 I concur in the decision of the court that Husband timely appealed from the family court’s three rulings. I write separately to express my view that, until the Arizona Supreme Court resolves the conflict between the Ghadimi and Reeck decisions, an appellant who has complied with either of those rulings should be deemed to have satisfied the timeliness requirement for establishing jurisdiction in this court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9799355. Public record. Not legal advice.