Search 

Azcourts.gov

Arizona Judicial Branch

Civil

 RULE  AFFECTS  SUMMARY AND IMPACT

Civil Rule 4(d)

R-12-0026

 

Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin

Summary: This change adds "constable" and "constable's deputy" to the list of persons authorized to serve process under this rule.

Impact: Information only


Civil Rule 5.1
Civil Rule 11

R-12-0027

See the note for information re: effective date 

Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin
Summary:  These rules facilitate limited-scope or short-term legal representation.

Amended Rule 5.1(c) permits a limited appearance.  An attorney may undertake limited representation of a person involved in a court proceeding in accordance with SCR 42, ER 1.2.

  • An attorney makes a limited appearance by filing and serving a Notice of Limited Scope Representation
  • The Notice of Limited Scope Representation must specify the matters, hearings, or issues for which the attorney will represent the party
  • Service on an attorney making a limited appearance constitutes effective service on that party
  • Upon an attorney's completion of the representation that is specified in the Notice of Limited Scope Representation, the attorney may withdraw

Amended Rule 11 permits an attorney to assist in drafting a pleading, motion or document filed by an otherwise self-represented person, and the attorney need not sign that pleading, motion, or document.

Note:  The Court entered an Order on December 5, 2012, adopting these rule changes as modified, effective January 1, 2013, and extending the comment period to May 21, 2013.   The Court has now adopted these rule changes permanently.

Impact: The attorney may withdraw when the attorney has completed the representation as specified in the notice.  The attorney may withdraw with the consent of the client, or without consent.  If counsel is moving for withdrawal without consent and the client files an objection within ten days after service of the motion, the court must hold a hearing to determine whether the attorney completed the representation.


Civil Rule
15(a)(1)

R-12-0040

Superior

Judges
Clerks
Summary: This amendment corrects an “unintended consequence” of a prior amendment regarding when a party may amend a pleading as a matter of course.

The rule formerly allowed an amendment “within” 21 days after service of a responsive pleading, which appeared to require the amending party to wait until after service of a responsive pleading before filing the amendment.  The new provision allows a party to amend a pleading “no later than” 21 days after service of a responsive pleading.  This permits the amending party to file an amended pleading before service of a response to the initial pleading.


Impact: Information only

Civil Rule
7.1

R-12-0042
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin
Summary:  New Rule 7.1(g) establishes a procedure for obtaining extensions of time to file response or reply memoranda on motions.

To be effective,

  • A notice of the extension with the parties’ agreement must be filed with the court, containing the dates when briefs will be due
  • The notice must state in its title the number of extensions agreed to concerning that filing (e.g., First Extension of Time To File Response on Motion To Dismiss)
  • If a notice of extension provides that a filing is due less than five days before a hearing, or if a notice is filed after the memorandum is due, the extension will not be effective without court approval
  • Otherwise, no order is necessary to obtain an extension under this subsection.  The extension is effective upon filing, unless the court disapproves of the change
  • This new rule does not apply to motion practice under Rule 56, which sets forth its own procedure for time extensions under Rule 56(c)(1)

Impact: Court docketing procedures for motions need to account for notices for extensions that parties file under this new rule.

Civil Rule
7.1
Civil Rule 56

R-12-0043
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Summary: This amended rule imposes limits on filing motions to strike.  It also provides a procedure for objecting to evidence submitted in connection with summary judgment motions.


Impact:
The intent of these amendments is to reduce the volume of motions to strike, and to reduce the length of the motions.  Objections to the admissibility of evidence on a motion for summary judgment must be concise, and must be stated in the responsive memorandum or the responsive statement of facts.


Civil Rule 54
Civil Rule 58

ARCAP 9

R-13-0005
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin
Summary: The amendment to Rule 54(c) provides that when the court intends to direct entry of judgment as to all claims and all parties, and that no further matters remain pending, a judgment must state that the court is entering the judgment pursuant to Rule 54(c).
 

The amendment to Rule 58(a) requires service on other parties of “proposed” forms of judgment.

The amendments to ARCAP 9 modify the time for filing a notice of appeal (“NOA”).

  • The time for filing a notice of appeal is calculated from the date of entry of an order granting or denying a  motion under Rules 50(b) [JMOL], 52(b) [findings of fact],  or 59(l) [alter or amend the judgment], or from the date of an order denying a motion under Rule 59(a) [motion for new trial]
  • If the parties file more than one of these motions, the time is calculated from the date of entry of the order regarding the last remaining motion
  • If a party files a NOA before the disposition of these motions, the appealing party has a duty to notify the Court of Appeals of the pendency and the disposition, and the COA suspends the appeal during that time
  • If a party files a notice of appeal after the court announces a decision or order, but before actual entry of the decision or order, the rule deems the NOA filed as of the date that the court enters its decision or order

Impact: Judges and clerks should be alert to inclusion of “Rule 54(c) language” in a final judgment.

The amendments to ARCAP 9

  • Will extend the time for filing a notice of appeal if a party files one or more of the specified post-judgment motions
  • Will allow “suspension” of the appeal by the Court of Appeals pending the conclusion of a post-judgment motion proceeding in the Superior Court

Civil Rules
16, 16.1, 26, 37, 38, 38.1, 72, 73, 74, 77

R-13-0017

See the note for information re: effective date
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin
Summary: These amendments alter the rules for case management.

There are no longer Motions to Set and Certificates of Readiness.  Instead, the parties will submit joint reports to the court with proposed scheduling orders. The amendments include new forms for joint reports and proposed scheduling orders in “expedited,” “standard,” and “complex” cases, allowing for differentiated case management. 

Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the deadlines in the proposed scheduling order must provide that all discovery will be completed and a private mediation or Rule 16.1 settlement conference will be held no more than 15 months after the filing of the complaint. Note that unless the court orders otherwise, no trial may be set unless the parties certify that they engaged in a settlement conference or private mediation or that they will do so by a date certain established by the court.

These rule amendments establish a new event, a “trial scheduling conference,” which must be held unless the Scheduling Order provides a trial date.  Note also that the court must endeavor to conduct a trial in an expedited case within twelve months after commencement of the action.

The amendments replace the “inactive” calendar with a “dismissal” calendar. 

Because the amendments abolish motions to set, a party no longer has the option of deferring a jury demand until filing a motion to set.  Instead, amended Rule 38(b) provides that a demand for a jury must be filed no later than the earlier of (i) the date on which the court sets a trial date, or (ii) the date on which a Joint Report and Scheduling Order is filed.  This is an earlier deadline than provided by the current rule.

Note: A Supreme Court implementation order:

  • Makes the new rules applicable to cases filed on and after April 15, 2014
  • Makes the new rules applicable to cases filed before April 15, 2014, unless prior to that date, the parties filed a proposed scheduling order, a party filed a motion to set, or the court entered a scheduling order.
  • For those cases in which none of the foregoing events occurred before April 15, 2014, the parties must comply with the new rules by June 30, 2014, or within 270 days from the case filing date, whichever occurs later
  • For those cases where one of the foregoing events did occur before April 15, 2014, the trial court may nevertheless apply the new case management rules for further proceedings
  • Cases that are pending on the inactive calendar will be dismissed on June 14, 2014, unless the parties comply with the requirements of the new rules prior to that date

Impact:  Some counties are already using procedures that are similar to those provided by the new rules.  All counties must adapt their case management systems and/or policies to comply with the new terminology and procedures under these rule amendments. Judicial officers, clerks, and administrators may wish to conduct training programs regarding these rules, or to attend training offered by the State Bar or other organizations.


Civil Rule
47(a)(3)

Criminal Rule
18.6(b)

R-13-0022
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Summary: These two rule amendments add words in the jurors’ oath specifically requiring jurors to follow the admonition.  The juror oaths in the civil and criminal rules are now identical.

The intent of the new oath is to dissuade jurors from using new technology, including internet searches and social media, during the course of a trial.

Impact:
  Clerks will need to use the new jurors’ oath. Judges may wish during the course of a trial to remind jurors of their oath, including that portion of the oath where the jurors agreed to follow the admonition.


Civil Rule 23

R-13-0040

See the note for information re: effective date
Superior

Judges
Clerks
Admin
Summary:  The Court amended the rule on class actions as a result of 2013 legislation, SB 1346.

Note: The Court adopted this rule amendment on an emergency basis on September 13, 2013.  On November 14, 2013, the Court made the amendments permanent.

Impact: The Order amends Rule 23 sections (c) and (f).

Rule 23(c):  An amendment to this section requires the court to hold a hearing to determine whether to maintain an alleged class action as a class action.  The court must enter an order following the hearing that states the reasons and evidence in support of the court’s determination.

Rule 23(f):  The trial court’s order certifying or denying class action status is appealable as a final judgment.  There is a stay of further proceedings pending an appeal, although on motion the court may allow the parties to conduct discovery.