Boyd v. State, No. 1 CA-CV 21-0684 (App. Div. I, December 5, 2023) (J.Brown) https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2023/1%20CA-CV%2021-0684%20-%20Boyd%20v.%20State%20-%20Opinion.pdf

HOUSE BILL 2466 SUPERCEDES THE 180 DAY TIME LIMIT OF A.R.S. § 12-514 BUT NOT THE STATUTE'S REQUIREMENT THAT A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT BE FILED AFTER SERVICE OF THE NOTICE OF CLAIM AND A LAWSUIT FILED AFTER THE SERVICE OF A NOTICE OF CLAIM MAY BE FILED BEFORE THE 60 DAY TIME LIMIT FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO ACCEPT THE SETTLEMENT OFFER IN THE NOTICE OF CLAIM/ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE CORRECTIONS IS A NONJURAL ENTITY THAT CANNOT BE SUED

On December 20, 2020, plaintiff served a Notice of Claim pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-821.01(A) and House Bill 2466 alleging he was sexually abused in 2001 at age 16 by a correctional officer while in custody of the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections [ADJC]. House Bill 2466 revived causes of action for victims of sexual abuse that were otherwise time barred if filed by December 31, 2020. Plaintiff submitted his complaint to prison authorities to be mailed on December 29, 2020 pursuant to Ariz. R. 3 Civ. P. 5.1(b)(4) naming his alleged assailant, the State and the ADJC. If he had waited 60 days from the service of the notice of claim the statute of limitations would have barred the action.  The state moved to dismiss the lawsuit based upon A.R.S. § 12-514 which requires a lawsuit claiming sexual assault be filed within 12 years after the victim turns 18.  The trial court granted the motion to dismiss and plaintiff appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals which affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part.

On appeal the state abandoned its argument on the statute of limitations instead taking the position the dismissal was proper because plaintiff's notice of claim was untimely.

House Bill 2466 provides that “'[n]otwithstanding any other law,' a cause of action that would be time-barred by: (1) § 12-514, (2) any applicable statute of limitations, (3) a claim presentation deadline, or (4) the expiration of any other limit is revived and may be commenced before December 31,

2020.” This bill supersedes the A.R.S. § 12-514 time limit for filing a notice of claim but not its requirement that a notice of claim be filed before the filing of a lawsuit.  Here the notice of claim was filed in compliance with the House Bill deadline and the lawsuit was filed after the serving of the notice of claim.  

A.R.S. § 12-821.01(E) gives the government 60 days to accept the settlement offer in a notice of claim and the claim is deemed denied 60 days after the service of the notice of claim if not expressly denied before then.  Here had plaintiff waited 60 days to file his lawsuit it would have been untimely.  The 60-day requirement gives the government the absolute right to accept the offer of judgment within 60 days but does not preclude the filing of a lawsuit before the 60 days runs as long as it is not filed until after the notice of claim is served.

Because the ADJC is a nonjural entity, dismissal of the complaint against that named defendant was proper.