Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog

Important Changes to the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure

Posted by Matt Schmidt | Dec 08, 2016 | 0 Comments

Many important changes to the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure will go into effect in 2017. Though it is recommended that every lawyer do their due diligence by reviewing the changes carefully, here is a summary of some of the rules to take an especially close look at:

1. Perhaps the most substantial change to the Rules is matching the scope of discovery allowed with the newer "proportional" standard in the Federal rules. Instead of simply being relevant, the parties and court must also weigh the importance of the issues in the case, amount in controversy, access to relevant information, resources available, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issue and burden of expense compared to the benefit. While critics contend this narrows the scope of what is discoverable and invites parties to challenge requests based on one of the factors stated above, others do not think it is going to change much to the current legal landscape. 26(b)(1)

2.    When parties meet and confer (11, 26, 37, 56), a form of certification is now required and mandates the parties actually speak to each other instead of simply communicating via letter and email. When one party fails to be responsive, the certification allows the other party to state they tried. When parties are required to work together in forming joint briefs, sanctions are encouraged for parties that do not cooperate or make themselves available. These line of rules encourage more overall cooperation and actual communication amongst the parties. 7.1(h), 7.4.

3. The deadline to respond to written discovery is now the federal 30 days instead of 40. Objections must be specific and any non-objectional portion of a request must still be answered or produced. If a party objects to a request for production but nevertheless produces some material, they must let the other party know if other material is being withheld based on the objection. 33, 34, 36.

4. The complexity and growth of technology and electronically stored information has led to new rules specifically designed to address this special type of discovery and litigation.  These rules encourage parties to work together in determining what, how and when ESI will be produced, with a special court proceeding in place to address any conflicts. They also encourage sanctions against any party who fails to preserve relevant ESI, the severity of the sanction depending on how prejudicial and intentional the spoliation is. Finally, they allow more leeway for witnesses to give testimony remotely. 26.1(b), 37(g), 43.

5. The rules require a broader, more specific, transparent and thorough disclosure of what insurance is available to cover a plaintiff's claim. This appears to come as a result of vague and incomplete insurance disclosures, leaving the plaintiff in the dark about an extremely important part of evaluating a case. 26.1

A great review of the rule changes can be found in the December 2016 issue of the Arizona Attorney here.

About the Author

Matt Schmidt

Matt graduated from the James E Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona in passing the Arizona bar exam in 2010. Matt's primary interest in law focuses on general personal injury and insurance bad faith.


There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Our team works together - for you!

Our award-winning lawyers are backed by a talented, caring team of legal professionals, paralegals, bilingual assistants, notaries, and others - all dedicated to you, your case, and the compensation you deserve.

No fees and no costs until we win.

As such we always have your case and your best interest in mind. When you win, we win too by providing the best legal care possible.

Thorough investigation and preparation.

We tirelessly and thoughtfully prepare every case we represent as though it was going to trial. This lets insurance companies know that we are a force to be reckoned with. As such, we settle successfully 98% of the time.