 |
ARIZONA STATE SENATE
Fifty-Seventh Legislature, Second Regular Session
venue; employee conflict; superior court
Purpose
Grants a party to a civil action pending in the superior court the right to a change of venue when a party to the action is an employee of the judicial branch or the clerk of the superior court in the county where the action is pending and specified conditions are met.
Background
In Arizona, a person may not be sued outside of the county in which the person resides, except under certain circumstances, including when: 1) there are several defendants who reside in different counties; 2) the action is against a public officer, in which case the action must be brought in the county in which the public officer holds office; and 3) the case is one of fraud or defalcation of public officers, in which case the action may be brought in the county in which the fraud was committed or the defalcation occurred (A.R.S. § 12-401).
The superior
court may transfer an action for trial to the superior court of a different
county upon written consent of the parties or the parties' attorneys. Venue may
also be changed if either party to a civil action pending in the superior court
files an affidavit in the action, after answer has been filed, alleging that:
1) there is so great a prejudice against the party requesting a change of venue
in the county where the action is pending that the party cannot obtain a fair
and impartial trial; 2) the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice
would be promoted by the change; or 3) there is other good and sufficient
cause, as determined by the court (A.R.S. §§ 12-405
and
12-406).
There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the state General Fund associated with this legislation.
Provisions
1. Specifies that, if a party to a civil action in the superior court is an employee of the judicial branch or the clerk of the superior court in the county where the action is pending, a change of venue as a matter of right only applies if the:
a) employee holds or held a leadership or supervisory position at the time the action was filed, including the position of judge, commissioner, presiding judge, court administrator, clerk of the superior court, chief deputy clerk, division director or an equivalent management position;
b) employee works or worked in the same division of the superior court to which the action is assigned; or
c) superior court in the county where the action is pending has three or fewer divisions, and the employee is employed by the judicial branch or clerk of the superior court in that county.
2. Stipulates that, if a party meets any of the outlined criteria for change of venue, either party is entitled to a change of venue as a matter of right.
3. Requires the court, on request of the party applying for the change of venue, to transfer the action to the most convenient adjoining county or to a county agreed upon by the parties.
4. Stipulates that, if a party does not meet the outlined criteria, a change in venue based solely on a party's employment may only be granted on a showing of good cause, including a demonstrated risk of actual bias or appearance of impropriety that cannot be adequately addressed through recusal, reassignment or use of a visiting judge.
5. Specifies that the outlined change of venue requirements relating to employees of the judicial branch or clerk of the superior court do not limit or replace any other authority of the court to order recusal, reassignment or appointment of a visiting judge.
6. Becomes effective on the general effective date.
House Action
JUD 1/21/26 DP 7-0-1-1
3rd Read 2/10/26 54-1-5
Prepared by Senate Research
March 2, 2026
ZD/KS/ci