--- name: az-personal-injury description: > Subject-matter bundle for Arizona personal-injury and tort actions. Triggers include "Arizona personal injury", "Arizona car accident", "Arizona auto accident lawsuit", "Arizona pure comparative negligence", "Arizona comparative fault", "A.R.S. 12-2505", "Arizona several liability", "joint liability abolished Arizona", "A.R.S. 12-2506", "nonparty at fault Arizona", "notice of nonparty at fault", "Arizona no damages cap", "Arizona no non-economic cap", "Arizona Constitution damages", "Arizona medical malpractice", "Arizona medical malpractice expert affidavit", "preliminary expert opinion affidavit Arizona", "A.R.S. 12-2603", "A.R.S. 12-2604", "Arizona notice of claim", "Arizona notice of claim 180 days", "A.R.S. 12-821.01", "Arizona public entity lawsuit", "Arizona personal injury statute of limitations", "A.R.S. 12-542", "dog bite Arizona", "A.R.S. 11-1025", "Arizona slip and fall", "Arizona premises liability", "Arizona wrongful death", "Arizona UM UIM". Covers Arizona's PURE comparative negligence (A.R.S. § 12-2505 — recovery reduced by fault share but never barred), several liability with the abolition of joint liability and the nonparty-at-fault mechanism (A.R.S. § 12-2506), the constitutional prohibition on statutory damage caps (Ariz. Const. art. 2 § 31 + art. 18 § 6 — Arizona has NO med-mal or non-economic damages cap), the medical-malpractice preliminary-expert-opinion-affidavit gate (A.R.S. § 12-2603) and expert qualification (A.R.S. § 12-2604), the strict 180-day notice of claim and 1-year SOL against public entities (A.R.S. §§ 12-821.01 / 12-821), the 2-year personal-injury SOL (A.R.S. § 12-542), dog-bite strict liability (A.R.S. §§ 11-1025 / 11-1020), and UM/UIM coverage. version: 0.1.0 --- # 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)