Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 12
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-145 (2026)

Appointment of judges pro tempore of the court of appeals

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Upon request of the chief judge of a division of the court of appeals, the chief justice of the state supreme court may appoint judges pro tempore of the court of appeals for such division in the manner prescribed by this article, subject to the availability of appropriated funds.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102 cases (50 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Simpson v. Owens, 85 P.3d 478 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Simpson v. Owens, 85 P.3d 478 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “[*] The Honorable John Foreman, judge of the Superior Court of Maricopa County, was authorized to participate as a Judge Pro Tempore of the Court of Appeals by order of the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court pursuant to Article 6, Section 31 of the Arizona Constitution…”
State v. Beasley, 70 P.3d 463 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “NOTES [1] The Honorable John Foreman, Judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court, has been authorized to participate in this appeal by order of the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court pursuant to Arizona Constitution, Article 6, Section 31, and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 to -147…”
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Burton, 66 P.3d 70 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Granville, Judge Pro Tempore of the Court of Appeals has been authorized to participate in this appeal by order of the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court pursuant to Arizona Constitution, Article 6, Section 31, and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 to -147 (1992 and Supp.2002).”
Gonzalez-Gunter v. Gunter, 471 P.3d 1024 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “In accordance with the authority granted by Article 6, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution and pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-145, the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court has designated Judge Johnsen as a judge pro tempore in the Court of Appeals, Division One, for the…”
Pankratz v. Willis, 744 P.2d 1182 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “VI, § 3 and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 to -147. BROOKS, Judge, specially concurring: I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion.”
Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. v. White, 65 P.3d 449 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “GARBARINO, Presiding Judge and BARBARA M. JARRETT, Judge Pro Tempore.”
Gilbert v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 745 P.2d 617 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “VI, § 3 and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 and 12-147. 1 . The purpose of local rule 2.”
Carlson v. Arizona State Pers. Bd., 153 P.3d 1055 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “6, § 31, and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 through 12-147 (1992). .”
Parkway Bank & Trust Co. v. Zivkovic, 304 P.3d 1109 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “In accordance with the authority granted by Article 6, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution and pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-145, the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court has designated Judge Hall as a judge pro tempore in the Court of Appeals, Division One, for the purpose…”
Reeck v. Mendoza, 304 P.3d 1122 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “The Honorable Robert Carter Olson, Presiding Judge of the Pinal County Superior Court, is authorized by the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court to participate in the disposition of this appeal pursuant to Article 6, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution and A.”
Collette v. Tolleson Unified Sch. Dist., No. 214, 54 P.3d 828 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Rayes, Judge Pro 1 Tem-pore of the Court of Appeals, Division One, has been authorized to participate in this appeal by order of the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court pursuant to Arizona Constitution, Article 6, Section 31 and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 through 12-147 (1992 and…”
Bar J Bar Cattle Co., Inc. v. Pace, 763 P.2d 545 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “VI, § 3 and A.R.S. §§ 12-145 to -147. 1 . The trial court found that New Mexico’s sale of the east half of Section 17 might constitute a breach of its covenant of good faith and fair dealing, because the loss of access to water arguably diminished the value of the rest of Bar J…”
Show all 102 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.