Rule 42.1. Change of Judge as a Matter of Right
Arizona Revised Statutes AnnotatedRules of Civil Procedure for the Superior Courts of Arizona
16 A.R.S. Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 42.1
Formerly cited as AZ ST RCP Rule 42(f)
Rule 42.1. Change of Judge as a Matter of Right
(a) When Available. In any action in superior court, except an action in the Tax Court, each side is entitled as a matter of right to a change of one judge. Each action, whether single or consolidated, must be treated as having only two sides. If two or more parties on a side have adverse or hostile interests, the presiding judge may allow additional changes of judge as a matter of right, but each side must have the right to the same number of such changes. The term “judge” as used in this rule refers to any judge, judge pro tem, or court commissioner. The term “presiding judge” as used in this rule refers to the presiding superior court judge in the county where the action is pending, or that judge's designee.
(2) Oral Notice. An oral request for change of judge must include the information required by Rule 42.1(b)(1)(A) and (B). When made, it is deemed to be an “oral notice of change of judge” for purposes of this rule. The judge must enter on the record the date of the oral notice, the requesting party's name, and the judge's disposition of the request. A party obtaining a change of judge based on an oral notice is deemed to have exercised its right to a change of judge under Rule 42.1(a). For purposes of this rule, an oral notice is deemed “filed” on the date that it is made on the record.
(2) If an assignment identifies a judge for the first time after the time period set forth in Rule 42.1(c)(1) has expired, or fewer than 10 days before that time period will expire, a notice is timely if filed within 10 days after the party receives notice of the new assignment, or within 10 days after the new judge is assigned, whichever is later.
(4) A notice of change of judge is ineffective if filed within 3 days of a scheduled proceeding, unless the parties have received fewer than 5-days' notice of that proceeding or the judge's assignment. The filing of an ineffective notice neither requires a change of judge nor bars the party who filed it from later filing a notice of change of judge that satisfies this rule's requirements.
(1) On Proper Notice. If a notice is timely filed and no waiver has occurred, the judge named in the notice should proceed no further in the action except to make such temporary orders as are absolutely necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage from occurring before the action can be transferred to another judge. If the named judge is the only judge in the county, that judge may also reassign the case.
(A) On Stipulation. If a notice of change of judge is filed, the parties should inform the court in writing if they have agreed on an available judge who is willing to hear the action. An agreement of all parties may be honored and, if so, bars further changes of judge as a matter of right unless the agreed-on judge becomes unavailable. If a judge to whom an action is assigned by agreement later becomes unavailable because of a change of calendar assignment, death, illness, or other incapacity, the parties may assert any rights under this rule that existed immediately before the assignment to that judge.
Credits
Added Sept. 2, 2016, effective Jan. 1, 2017.
16 A. R. S. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 42.1, AZ ST RCP Rule 42.1
State Court Rules are current with amendments received through November 15, 2023. The Code of Judicial Administration is current with amendments received through November 1, 2023.
End of Document |