Adopted- Permanent Basis

These rules, previously adopted on an emergency basis, have been made permanent.

Summary: This rule has been conformed to amendments to A.R.S. § 13-3602(G) that authorize the inclusion of animals within the terms of an Order of Protection:

The judicial officer may also grant the plaintiff the exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal that is owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the plaintiff, the defendant, or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the plaintiff or the defendant, and order the defendant to stay away from the animal and forbid the defendant from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, committing an act of cruelty or neglect in violation of Section 13-2910, or otherwise disposing of the animal.

Impact: To implement this new provision, courts should provide individuals who are seeking an Order of Protection with the modified Plaintiff’s Guide Sheet that is appended to Administrative Directive 2010-25. If the court orders that an animal be protected, the animal’s name and species should be entered in the “Other Orders” field on the Order of Protection.

Summary: This amendment conformed the violator/defendant copy of the Arizona Traffic Ticket and Complaint to A.R.S. § 28-1557 by removing the violator/defendant’s social security number from that copy.

Impact: Information only. The law enforcement copy and the court’s copy of the ATTC continue to show the social security number of the violator/defendant.

Summary: These rules were amended to conform to statutory changes.

Impact:

1. Rule 38(A) (appointed counsel for the child) and Rule 40(A) (an appointed guardian ad litem for the child) require that the appointed individuals meet with the child before the preliminary protective hearing, and if that is not possible, within fourteen days thereafter. These individuals must also meet with the child before any substantive hearing, unless a judge upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances modifies this requirement. (See further R-11-0013, supra.)
2. Rule 47.1 requires that new mandatory judicial determinations must be made: (1) at the initial dependency hearing (whether the department is attempting to identify and assess placement of the child with the child’s siblings, if such placement is possible and in the child’s best interests); and (2) at the permanency hearing (what efforts have been made in the permanency plan to place the child with the child’s siblings or to provide the child with frequent visitation or contact with the child’s siblings, unless that is not possible or it is contrary to the child’s or sibling’s safety or well being).
3. Rule 56 requires that at the disposition hearing, the court must make the determinations required by Rule 47.1 (a conforming technical change).

Summary: This amendment conformed the rule to HB 2109. It allows the presiding judge of the county to close the Superior Court on the day after Thanksgiving, and to keep the court open on Columbus Day, if the county’s board of supervisors has designated the day after Thanksgiving as a legal holiday in place of Columbus Day.

Impact: The court’s calendar should conform to the holiday schedule that has been adopted.

Summary: In conformity with a change to A.R.S. § 13-4505, Rule 11.3 was amended so that “at least one” of “at least two” experts appointed for a Rule 11 exam no longer needs to be a psychiatrist, as previously required; although on motion of a party or upon the court’s motion, one of the experts may be a licensed psychiatrist. Under the amended rule, the parties may also stipulate to the appointment of a single expert, but only with approval of the court.

Impact: Each court should assure that it has a sufficient number of psychologists available for court appointments in Rule 11 proceedings.

Rules 8.4 and 32.10

R-11-0021

AOC Contact: Mark Meltzer

Superior Court
Justice Court
Municipal Court

Judges
Clerks
Administrators

Summary: Because of new legislation, the term “intellectual disability” replaces the term “mental retardation” in Rule 8.4 (excluded periods) and Rule 32.10 (review of mental retardation determination).

Impact: Standard minute entries and orders concerning mental retardation proceedings should now reflect the new term, “intellectual disability.”

Rule 68

R-11-0022 

AOC Contact:
Kathy Sekardi

Summary: Under Rule 68(A)(2)(a), counseling must be completed within 60 days of the filing of a petition for conciliation.   During this time, any pending action for dissolution, legal separation, or annulment is stayed, unless the court lifts the stay before the expiration of the 60-day period.

New Rule 68(A)(2)(d), which is a result of a legislative change, allows a party to petition the court for an extension of the stay of proceedings.  The moving party must state the basis for the extension and include a plan for reconciliation or a counseling schedule. The court may grant a reasonable extension of up to 120 days, if the moving party establishes good cause for the extension. The court shall not grant an extension, if the other party objects with good cause.

Impact: A new document entitled “petition for extension of a stay of proceedings” may require a new docketing code.  Calendaring systems should anticipate extensions of up to 120 days for completion of conciliation.

Rule 5

R-11-0020 

AOC Contact: Caroline Lautt-Owens

Summary: A legislative change in Title 14 allows a party to petition for continuation of a conservatorship or other protective order beyond a minor’s eighteenth birthday rather than reinitiating proceedings after the minor turns eighteen.

New Probate Rule 5(c) ensures that the caption and case filing number of a conservatorship or other protective proceeding initiated pursuant to this legislation remains constant. The new rule therefore provides that a petition to continue a minor conservatorship or other protective order pursuant to A.R.S. §14-5401(b) will be filed in the pending protective proceeding case; and if the court grants the petition, the case number will remain the same but the caption will be amended to reflect that the conservatorship or other protective order is for an adult.

This rule change assures that the fiduciary continues to have access to financial accounts and other private information after entry of the continuation order.

Impact: In situations where a minor’s conservatorship is continued into adulthood, the caption will need to be amended to reflect the majority of the protected person, although the case number remains the same.