v0.1.0 to v0.1.8

---

name: az-personal-injury

description: >

---

# Arizona Personal-Injury Practice

> **NOT LEGAL ADVICE.** Arizona tort practice is deadline-sensitive

> and has structural features that diverge sharply from most states —

> pure comparative negligence, the constitutional ban on damage caps,

> the nonparty-at-fault apportionment regime, and the strict public-

> entity notice of claim. Statute numbers, day counts, and SOLs

> change — verify every SOL, threshold, and predicate-notice clock

> against the current A.R.S. before relying, and consult a licensed

> Arizona attorney about your specific case.

Use this subject-matter bundle for Arizona personal-injury and tort

actions — auto accidents, premises (slip-and-fall), product and

general negligence, medical malpractice, wrongful death, dog bites,

and claims against governmental entities.

## At a glance — the things that move every AZ case

1. **2-year personal-injury SOL** at A.R.S. § 12-542. Claims against

a **public entity / public employee** run on a much shorter

**1-year SOL** (A.R.S. § 12-821) and require a **180-day notice

of claim** first (A.R.S. § 12-821.01). Calendar at intake.

2. **PURE comparative negligence** under A.R.S. § 12-2505 — a

plaintiff's recovery is **reduced** in proportion to fault but is

**NEVER barred**, even if the plaintiff is **more at fault than

the defendant**. Arizona is NOT a modified / 50%-bar state.

3. **Several liability only** under A.R.S. § 12-2506 — Arizona

**abolished joint liability**. Each defendant pays only its own

allocated percentage of fault. Identify every at-fault actor.

4. **Nonparty at fault** (A.R.S. § 12-2506(B)) — the defense may

shift fault to an absent person by serving a **notice of nonparty

at fault** within the deadline in Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26(b). This

is the central defensive lever in Arizona tort cases.

5. **NO DAMAGE CAPS — constitutional.** The Arizona Constitution

**prohibits** the legislature from limiting injury/death damages

(**art. 2 § 31** and **art. 18 § 6**). Arizona has **no med-mal

cap and no non-economic-damages cap** of any kind.

6. **Med-mal preliminary expert affidavit** (A.R.S. § 12-2603) plus

**expert qualification** (A.R.S. § 12-2604) — the early

gates in health-care negligence cases (the § 12-2603 certification

is filed **with the claim**, not pre-suit; the affidavit is served

with the Rule 26.1 initial disclosures).

7. **Dog-bite strict liability** (A.R.S. § 11-1025) — owner liable

regardless of the dog's prior viciousness or the owner's knowledge.

8. **UM/UIM coverage** is a frequent secondary recovery source in

auto cases — confirm the policy and any statutory selection.

## Statute-of-limitations catalog

| Claim | SOL | Citation |

|---|---|---|

| **Personal injury (general negligence)** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Wrongful death** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Auto bodily injury / property damage** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Premises / slip-and-fall** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Medical malpractice** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Dog bite (statutory strict liability)** | **1 year** | A.R.S. § 12-541(5) — "liability created by statute" (the § 11-1025 strict-liability action) |

| **Dog bite (common-law negligence)** | **2 years** | A.R.S. § 12-542 |

| **Claim against a public entity / employee** | **1 year** + **180-day notice of claim** prerequisite | A.R.S. § 12-821 + § 12-821.01 |

**Notes** (point to corpus — `az-law-references` `az-statutes-debt/` —

for the operative day counts and any tolling / discovery-rule text;

this skill does not hardcode them):

- The **public-entity 1-year SOL** (A.R.S. § 12-821) is far shorter

than the general 2-year clock and runs alongside the **180-day

notice of claim** (A.R.S. § 12-821.01). Treat any government

defendant as a SOL emergency.

- Arizona recognizes a **discovery rule** for accrual in some claims

(e.g., latent medical-malpractice injury) — confirm accrual and any

minority / unsound-mind tolling in corpus before relying on a

filing date.

- The statutory **dog-bite strict-liability** action and a **common-

law** negligence dog-bite action carry **different** limitation

periods — confirm which clock applies in corpus.

## Pure comparative negligence — A.R.S. § 12-2505

Arizona is a **pure comparative negligence** jurisdiction. This is a

distinctive, plaintiff-favorable feature — flag it clearly:

- **A.R.S. § 12-2505(A)** — "the claimant's action is **not barred**,

but the full damages shall be **reduced in proportion to the

relative degree of the claimant's fault**." A plaintiff who is

**80% at fault still recovers 20%** of their damages. There is **no

50% bar** and **no greater-than-defendant bar** — contrast the

modified / 51%-bar systems used in most states.

- **The only carve-out** is for a claimant who **intentionally,

wilfully, or wantonly** caused or contributed to the injury or

wrongful death — that claimant has **no right** to comparative

apportionment (A.R.S. § 12-2505(A)).

- Fault is assessed by the trier of fact and applied across **all**

contributing actors, including nonparties (see § 12-2506 below).

## Several liability and nonparty at fault — A.R.S. § 12-2506

Arizona **abolished joint-and-several liability** for most tort

actions. The apportionment regime is the structural heart of Arizona

tort defense:

- **A.R.S. § 12-2506(A)** — "Each defendant is liable **only** for

the amount of damages allocated to that defendant **in direct

proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault**." The court

enters **separate, several judgments** reflecting each defendant's

proportionate share. There is no contribution among tortfeasors in

the ordinary case because no one overpays its share.

- **A.R.S. § 12-2506(B) — nonparty at fault.** The fault of a

**nonparty** may be considered in the allocation **if** the

plaintiff settled with that nonparty **or** the defending party

gives **notice before trial** identifying the nonparty and the

basis for attributing fault. The mechanics — content and the

**deadline** — are governed by **Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26(b)** (the

notice of nonparty at fault). Missing the rule's deadline forfeits

the ability to point the jury at the absent actor.

- **A.R.S. § 12-2506(D) — exceptions (joint liability survives).**

Defendants remain **jointly** liable where they (1) **acted in

concert**, (2) one acted as the **agent or servant** of the other,

or (3) liability arises under the **federal Employers' Liability

Act**. These are narrow — confirm the current list in corpus.

**Strategic upshot:** because each defendant pays only its allocated

share and the defense can shift fault onto empty chairs, **finding

and joining every solvent at-fault actor** — and **policing the

nonparty-at-fault notice** under Rule 26(b) — drives recovery in

Arizona multi-defendant cases.

## NO damage caps — the constitutional prohibition

**Arizona has no statutory cap on damages of any kind** — no

non-economic cap, no medical-malpractice cap, no punitive cap by

statute. This is a **constitutional** rule, not merely a legislative

choice, and it is the single most distinctive feature of Arizona tort

law:

- **Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 31** — "**No law shall be enacted in this

state limiting the amount of damages to be recovered for causing

the death or injury of any person.**"

- **Ariz. Const. art. 18, § 6** — "**The right of action to recover

damages for injuries shall never be abrogated, and the amount

recovered shall not be subject to any statutory limitation.**"

Together these provisions **forbid the Arizona legislature from

capping** injury or wrongful-death damages. Any attempt to impose a

damages cap by statute is unconstitutional. (Both provisions carry a

narrow carve-out for persons injured while attempting or engaged in

felony conduct.) Do **not** import another jurisdiction's cap

framework — in Arizona, plead **uncapped** economic and non-economic

damages.

## Medical malpractice — A.R.S. § 12-561 et seq.

Health-care liability is governed by A.R.S. Title 12, Chapter 5.1

("Actions Relating to Health Care," § 12-561 et seq.). Note that

**there is no damages cap** (above) — the gating issues are the

**expert affidavit** and **expert qualification** requirements:

### Preliminary expert opinion affidavit — A.R.S. § 12-2603

- **§ 12-2603(A)** — the claimant must **certify in a written

statement filed and served with the claim** whether or not expert

opinion testimony is necessary to prove the standard of care or

liability.

- **§ 12-2603(B)** — if the claimant certifies that expert testimony

**is** necessary, the claimant must **serve a preliminary expert

opinion affidavit with the initial disclosures** required by

**Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26.1**. The affidavit must address the expert's

qualifications, the standard of care, the manner of breach, and how

the breach caused the injury (confirm the statutory element list in

corpus).

- A defective or missing affidavit exposes the claim to dismissal —

treat it as an early case-dispositive gate.

### Expert qualifications — A.R.S. § 12-2604

The standard-of-care expert must satisfy Arizona's **matching-

specialty** rule — broadly, the expert must specialize in the **same

specialty** as the defendant (or, if the defendant is board-certified,

be **board-certified** in that specialty) and, during the year

immediately before the alleged malpractice, have devoted a majority

of professional time to **active clinical practice** or to

**instruction** of students in that specialty. Confirm the exact

qualification text in corpus before relying.

## Public entities — the notice of claim and 1-year SOL

Claims against the State, counties, cities, school districts, and

public employees are governed by A.R.S. Title 12, Article 2 — and the

prerequisites are **strict** and **commonly fatal**:

- **A.R.S. § 12-821.01 — 180-day notice of claim.** A person with a

claim against a public entity, public school, or public employee

must **file a notice of claim within 180 days** after the cause of

action accrues. The notice must contain **facts sufficient to

permit the entity to understand the basis of liability** and a

**specific amount for which the claim can be settled** together

with **facts supporting that amount**. **A claim not filed within

180 days is barred** — Arizona courts enforce this strictly, and a

defective sum-certain demand can sink the claim.

- **A.R.S. § 12-821 — 1-year SOL.** Even after a timely notice of

claim, the lawsuit itself must be filed **within one year** after

the cause of action accrues — half the general 2-year clock.

- **Calendar both clocks separately at intake.** A government

defendant turns a routine PI matter into a deadline emergency: the

180-day notice runs first, the 1-year suit clock runs alongside it.

## Dog-bite liability — A.R.S. §§ 11-1025 / 11-1020

- **A.R.S. § 11-1025(A) — strict liability.** The owner of a dog that

**bites a person** in a public place or while the person is

**lawfully** in or on a private place (including the owner's

property) is **liable for damages "regardless of the former

viciousness of the dog or the owner's knowledge of its

viciousness."** No "one free bite" rule applies to the statutory

action.

- **A.R.S. § 11-1020** — companion provision imposing liability on a

person who allows a **dog to be at large** for any resulting injury

to person or property (broader than a bite); confirm the interaction

with § 11-1025 in corpus.

- **Provocation defense** — § 11-1025 cross-references the definition

of "provocation" (see A.R.S. § 11-1027); provocation is the

principal statutory defense.

- Distinguish the **statutory strict-liability** action from a

**common-law negligence** dog-bite claim — they carry different

limitation periods (see SOL catalog).

## Uninsured / underinsured motorist (UM/UIM)

In auto cases, **UM/UIM coverage** under the injured person's own (or

a resident relative's) policy is a frequent secondary recovery source

where the at-fault driver is uninsured or under-insured:

- Confirm the policy limits, any required **written rejection /

selection** of UM/UIM coverage, and the **stacking** rules.

- UM/UIM claims are often **contractual** and may carry **policy /

contractual** notice and suit deadlines distinct from the tort SOL —

read the policy and confirm the operative limitation in corpus.

## High-yield Arizona PI checks

1. **What's the SOL?** General PI **2 years** (A.R.S. § 12-542).

Public-entity defendant → **1 year** (§ 12-821) **+ 180-day notice

of claim** (§ 12-821.01). Dog-bite statutory vs. common-law clock?

2. **Comparative fault?** Arizona is **PURE** — plaintiff recovers

even if **more than 50%** at fault (A.R.S. § 12-2505), reduced by

fault share. Only intentional/wilful/wanton conduct forfeits

apportionment.

3. **Multiple actors?** Several liability only (A.R.S. § 12-2506(A));

each defendant pays its own share. Watch for a defense **notice of

nonparty at fault** under § 12-2506(B) / **Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26(b)**

— and join every solvent at-fault actor.

4. **Damages?** **No caps** — plead uncapped non-economic and economic

damages (Ariz. Const. art. 2 § 31 + art. 18 § 6). Do not import

another jurisdiction's cap.

5. **Medical malpractice?** Certify under **§ 12-2603(A)**; serve the

**preliminary expert opinion affidavit** with Rule 26.1 initial

disclosures (**§ 12-2603(B)**); confirm the expert satisfies the

matching-specialty rule (**§ 12-2604**).

6. **Public defendant?** **180-day notice of claim** with a sum-

certain settlement demand and supporting facts (§ 12-821.01); **1-

year suit clock** (§ 12-821). Both strict.

7. **Dog bite?** Statutory strict liability (§ 11-1025) — owner liable

regardless of prior viciousness; assess the provocation defense

(§ 11-1027).

8. **Auto case?** UM/UIM coverage available? Policy limits, selection

/ rejection, stacking, contractual notice deadlines?

## Drafting checklist

- [ ] Confirm the **2-year SOL** (or the **1-year** public-entity

clock) is not running out within 30 days; calendar the **180-day

notice of claim** separately for any government defendant.

- [ ] Plead **pure comparative negligence** awareness — recovery is

reduced, **never barred**, by plaintiff's fault share (A.R.S.

§ 12-2505).

- [ ] Identify and **join every at-fault actor**; track the defense

**notice of nonparty at fault** (A.R.S. § 12-2506(B) / Ariz. R.

Civ. P. 26(b)) and move to add necessary defendants.

- [ ] In the damages prayer, plead **uncapped** economic **and** non-

economic damages — Arizona's Constitution bars statutory caps

(art. 2 § 31 + art. 18 § 6). Do not hardcode any cap.

- [ ] For **medical malpractice**, file the **§ 12-2603(A)

certification** with the complaint and serve the **preliminary

expert opinion affidavit** with the Rule 26.1 initial

disclosures; confirm the expert meets **§ 12-2604**.

- [ ] For a **public defendant**, serve the **§ 12-821.01 notice of

claim** within 180 days with a **specific settlement amount and

supporting facts**, then file suit within the **1-year**

§ 12-821 window.

- [ ] For a **dog bite**, plead **§ 11-1025** strict liability and

anticipate the **provocation** defense (§ 11-1027).

- [ ] In an **auto** case, identify any **UM/UIM** coverage and its

separate contractual deadlines.

## Composition

- For statewide format and caption: `az-statewide-format`

- For first responsive pleading and affirmative defenses:

`az-first-30-days`

- For drafting motions / declarations / orders: `az-draft-motion`,

`az-draft-declaration`, `az-draft-order`

- For SOL / notice-of-claim clocks: `az-deadlines`

- For discovery (incl. Rule 26(b) nonparty-at-fault notice and Rule

26.1 initial disclosures): `az-discovery`

- For QC: `az-quality-check`, `az-fact-check`

## References

- `az-law-references` — A.R.S., Ariz. R. Civ. P., Ariz. R. Evid.,

Arizona Constitution, and federal symlinks (`az-statutes-debt/`

holds the verbatim statutory text — point there for SOL day counts

and operative section text)

- A.R.S. § 12-542 — 2-year personal-injury / wrongful-death SOL

- A.R.S. § 12-541(5) — 1-year statutory-liability limitation (the

§ 11-1025 dog-bite strict-liability action)

- A.R.S. § 12-2505 — pure comparative negligence (recovery reduced,

never barred)

- A.R.S. § 12-2506 — several liability; nonparty at fault (B);

acting-in-concert / agency exceptions (D)

- A.R.S. § 12-561 et seq. — actions relating to health care

- A.R.S. § 12-2603 — preliminary expert opinion affidavit (med-mal)

- A.R.S. § 12-2604 — expert qualifications (med-mal)

- A.R.S. § 12-821 — 1-year SOL against a public entity / employee

- A.R.S. § 12-821.01 — 180-day notice of claim against a public

entity / public school / public employee

- A.R.S. § 11-1025 — dog-bite strict liability

- A.R.S. § 11-1020 — dog-at-large liability (injury to person or

property)

- A.R.S. § 11-1027 — definition of "provocation" (dog-bite defense)

- Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 31 — no law limiting damages for death or

injury

- Ariz. Const. art. 18, § 6 — right of action never abrogated; amount

recovered not subject to any statutory limitation

- Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26(b) — notice of nonparty at fault

- Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26.1 — initial disclosures (trigger for the § 12-

2603(B) preliminary expert affidavit)