Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512 (2026)

Opposition to an award

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Upon filing of a pleading in opposition to an award, and upon an adequate showing in support thereof, the court shall decline to confirm and award and enter judgment thereon where:

1. The award was procured by corruption, fraud or other undue means;

2. There was evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral or corruption in any of the arbitrators or misconduct prejudicing the rights of any party;

3. The arbitrators exceeded their powers;

4. The arbitrators refused to postpone the hearing upon sufficient cause being shown therefor or refused to hear evidence material to the controversy or otherwise so conducted the hearing, contrary to the provisions of section 12-1505, as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party; or

5. There was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined in proceedings under section 12-1502 and the adverse party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; but the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.

B. In declining to confirm an award on grounds other than stated in paragraph 5 of subsection A the court may order a rehearing before new arbitrators chosen as provided in the agreement, or in the absence thereof, by the court in accordance with section 12-1503, or if the court declines to confirm the award on grounds set forth in paragraphs 3 and 4 of subsection A the court may order a rehearing before the arbitrators who made the award or their successors appointed in accordance with section 12-1503. The time within which the agreement requires the award to be made is applicable to the rehearing and commences from the date of the order.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 51 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Morgan v. Carillon Investments, Inc., 88 P.3d 1159 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Morgan v. Carillon Investments, Inc., 88 P.3d 1159 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 31× “Plaintiffs opposed the motion to dismiss, contending that their Application was a motion to decline to confirm the NASD award under A.R.S. § 12-1512 (2003), which does not contain a filing deadline.”

Atreus Communities Grp. v. Stardust Dev., Inc., 277 P.3d 208 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 11× “The party opposing the confirmation must file a pleading and make an adequate showing in opposition based upon one of the grounds specified in A.R.S. § 12-1512. A.R.S. § 12-1512(A). The application, although served in the manner in which a summons is served, is treated as a…”

Smith v. Pinnamaneni, 254 P.3d 409 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 9× “¶ 13 Further, Defendants not only agreed to raise their defenses in arbitration but, by doing so, essentially agreed to limit their challenges to confirmation of the arbitration award in superior court to those enumerated in A.R.S. § 12-1512 (2003). Heinig v. Hud-man, 177 Ariz.”

FIA Card Servs., N.A. v. Levy, 200 P.3d 1020 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 11× “” After a hearing, the trial court concluded Levy had failed to prove any of the grounds upon which a court may vacate an arbitration award under A.R.S. § 12-1512, granted FIA’s motion to confirm the award, and denied Levy’s cross-motion.”

Nolan v. Kenner, 250 P.3d 236 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 7× “Kenner fails to cite the statutory basis for declining to confirm an arbitration award on appeal, however he contended in the trial court that representation by a foreign attorney constitutes “undue means” pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1512(A)(1). The superior court may reject an…”

Broemmer v. Abortion Servs. of Phoenix, Ltd., 840 P.2d 1013 (Ariz. 1992). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 12-1512. Thus, on the face of it, the contract to arbitrate is plainly reasonable and enforceable unless there are grounds to revoke it.”

Brake Masters Sys., Inc. v. Gabbay, 78 P.3d 1081 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “Arguing that the decision on the arbitrability issue was incorrect is not a proper ground under § 12-1512 on which to object to a court’s confirmation of an arbitration award.”

Morgan v. Carillon Investments, Inc., 109 P.3d 82 (Ariz. 2005). · cites it 6× “§ 12-1513’s ninety-day limitation on a motion to vacate an arbitration award filed pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1512, is dispositive in this case.”

Wages v. Smith Barney Harris Upham & Co., 937 P.2d 715 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “” Similarly, A.R.S. § 12-1512(A)(2) provides that “the court shall decline to confirm an award and enter judgment thereon where .”

Verdex Steel & Constr. Co. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 509 P.2d 240 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 8× “Under A.R.S. § 12-1512, subsec. A, par. 5, one who is not bound by contract to arbitrate and who voluntarily participates in an arbitration proceeding, without making a clear record of non-participation in the binding effects of the arbitration, is bound by the award to the same…”

Fisher Ex Rel. Fisher v. Nat'l Gen. Ins., 965 P.2d 100 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “Upon the expiration of twenty days from service *369 of the application, which shall be made upon the party against whom the award has been made, the court shall enter judgment upon the award unless opposition is made in accordance with § 12-1512. A.R.S. § 12-1511. The trial…”

Goldsberry v. Hohn, 583 P.2d 1360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 5× “Upon the expiration of twenty days from service of the application, which shall be made upon the party against whom the award has been made, the court shall enter judgment upon the award unless opposition is made in accordance with § 12-1512.” BACKGROUND On February 22, 1972…”

Show all 51 citing cases →

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A) — 14 cases

Atreus Communities Grp. v. Stardust Dev., Inc., 277 P.3d 208 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “The party opposing the confirmation must file a pleading and make an adequate showing in opposition based upon one of the grounds specified in A.R.S. § 12-1512. A.R.S. § 12-1512(A). The application, although served in the manner in which a summons is served, is treated as a…”

FIA Card Servs., N.A. v. Levy, 200 P.3d 1020 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “” After a hearing, the trial court concluded Levy had failed to prove any of the grounds upon which a court may vacate an arbitration award under A.R.S. § 12-1512, granted FIA’s motion to confirm the award, and denied Levy’s cross-motion.”

Morgan v. Carillon Investments, Inc., 88 P.3d 1159 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). “Plaintiffs opposed the motion to dismiss, contending that their Application was a motion to decline to confirm the NASD award under A.R.S. § 12-1512 (2003), which does not contain a filing deadline.”

Brake Masters Sys., Inc. v. Gabbay, 78 P.3d 1081 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “Arguing that the decision on the arbitrability issue was incorrect is not a proper ground under § 12-1512 on which to object to a court’s confirmation of an arbitration award.”

Hirt v. Hervey, 578 P.2d 624 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A)(1) — 7 cases

Nolan v. Kenner, 250 P.3d 236 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “Kenner fails to cite the statutory basis for declining to confirm an arbitration award on appeal, however he contended in the trial court that representation by a foreign attorney constitutes “undue means” pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1512(A)(1). The superior court may reject an…”

Goldsberry v. Hohn, 583 P.2d 1360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). “Upon the expiration of twenty days from service of the application, which shall be made upon the party against whom the award has been made, the court shall enter judgment upon the award unless opposition is made in accordance with § 12-1512.” BACKGROUND On February 22, 1972…”

Fia Card Servs. v. Douglas B. Levy (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A)(2) — 3 cases

Wages v. Smith Barney Harris Upham & Co., 937 P.2d 715 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). “” Similarly, A.R.S. § 12-1512(A)(2) provides that “the court shall decline to confirm an award and enter judgment thereon where .”

Martinez v. Barba (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A)(3) — 14 cases

State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Wise, 721 P.2d 674 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).

Einhorn v. Valley Med. Specialists, P.C., 838 P.2d 1332 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A)(4) — 4 cases

Canon Sch. Dist. No. 50 v. W.E.S. Constr. Co., 868 P.2d 1014 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).

Berent v. Mroczkowska (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).

Tessler v. Progressive (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).

Richert v. Buck (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(A)(5) — 3 cases

Smith v. Pinnamaneni, 254 P.3d 409 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “¶ 13 Further, Defendants not only agreed to raise their defenses in arbitration but, by doing so, essentially agreed to limit their challenges to confirmation of the arbitration award in superior court to those enumerated in A.R.S. § 12-1512 (2003). Heinig v. Hud-man, 177 Ariz.”

Migneault v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 519 P.2d 1162 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974).

Frazer v. Frazzano (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1512(B) — 1 case

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.