A. A judgment for the payment of money that has been entered and docketed in the civil docket or civil order book of the United States district court or superior court, whether originally rendered by it or entered on a transcript of judgment from another court, or recorded with the county recorder, may be renewed by filing an affidavit for renewal with the clerk of the proper court, except that an affidavit for renewal may not be filed to renew a judgment entered on or before August 2, 2013 unless that judgment was renewed on or before August 2, 2018.
B. The judgment creditor or the judgment creditor's personal representative or assignee, within ninety days preceding the expiration of ten years from the date of entry of such judgment, may make and file an affidavit, known as a renewal affidavit, entitled as in the action setting forth:
1. The names of the parties, the name of the court in which docketed, if recorded the name of the county in which recorded, the date and amount of the judgment, if recorded, the number and page of the book in which recorded by the county recorder, the name of the owner of the judgment, and the owner's source and succession of title, if not the judgment creditor.
2. That no execution is anywhere outstanding and unreturned on the judgment, or if any execution is outstanding, that fact shall be stated.
3. The date and amount of all payments on the judgment and that all payments have been duly credited on the judgment.
4. That there are no setoffs or counterclaims in favor of the judgment debtor, and if a counterclaim or setoff does exist in favor of the judgment debtor, the amount thereof, if certain, or, if the counterclaim or setoff is unsettled or undetermined, a statement that when it is settled or determined by action or otherwise, it may be allowed as a payment or credit on the judgment.
5. The exact amount due on the judgment after allowing all setoffs and counterclaims known to affiant, and other facts or circumstances necessary to a complete disclosure as to the exact condition of the judgment.
C. If the judgment was docketed by the clerk of the court on a certified copy from any other court and subsequently an abstract recorded with the county recorder, the affidavit, in addition to the foregoing, shall set forth a statement of each county in which such transcript has been docketed and abstract recorded. The affidavit shall be verified positively by the person making it, and not on information and belief.
D. The filing of the affidavit in the office of the clerk of the court where the judgment is entered and docketed shall renew and revive the judgment to the extent of the balance shown due in the affidavit. An order of the court, or other action by a judge, is not necessary to complete the renewal.
E. Additional and successive renewal affidavits as provided for in subsection B of this section may be made and filed within ninety days of expiration of ten years from the date of the filing of a prior renewal affidavit.
F. Recorded judgments that have been timely renewed by a renewal affidavit and successive affidavits, even if such successive affidavits were not authorized by prior law, may be renewed as provided in this section if the prior renewal affidavits were filed within ninety days from the expiration of each successive ten year period.
Notes of Decisions
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
· cites it 82× “Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
Lachter v. Smith, 101 P.3d 637 (Ariz. 2004).
· cites it 11× “We assume, by implication, that A.R.S. § 12-1612, which provides the mechanism for filing subsequent renewal affidavits, would also qualify as an "applicable nonbankruptcy law” that may be stayed by bankruptcy proceedings.”
JC Penney v. Lane, 3 P.3d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 8× “”) section 12-1612. By mistake, the affidavit referred to the judgment as a Maricopa County judgment rather than a Coconino County judgment, stated that the judgment was recorded in the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder rather than the Coconino County Recorder, and named…”
Associated Aviation Underwriters v. Wood, 98 P.3d 572 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “, provides: *179 Intervenors concede that they failed to renew the Gerardo judgments by affidavit pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1612 but nonetheless contend those judgments have not expired under § 12-1551.”
Hall v. World Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 943 P.2d 855 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 5× “section 12-1612. Pursuant to A.R.S. section 12-1611, Hall’s filing of an action on the California judgment renewed the judgment.”
Crye v. Edwards, 873 P.2d 665 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 6× “§ 12-155KB) provides: No execution or other process shall be issued upon a judgment after the expiration of five years from the date of its entry unless the judgment is renewed by affidavit or process pursuant to § 12-1612 or an action is brought thereon within five years from…”
State ex rel. Indus. Comm'n v. Galloway, 230 P.3d 708 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 6× “Section 12-1551(B) expressly provides two means to extend the period in which to execute the judgment: either by affidavit or process pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1612, or by bringing an action on the judgment within the five-year period.”
Harle v. Williams, 438 P.3d 699 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 3× “§ 12-1551(B) because Harle did not timely renew it under A.R.S. § 12-1612. After briefing, the trial court determined that the judgment "remain[ed] enforceable because the period of enforceability was tolled while Plaintiff was legally barred from enforcing the judgment.”
Fid. Nat'l Fin. Inc. v. Friedman, 238 P.3d 118 (Ariz. 2010).
· cites it 2× “The affidavit renewal process is set forth in § 12-1612 (2003). Like its predecessors, § 12-1551(B) preserves the option of renewal through “an action .”
Coggins v. Wright, 526 P.2d 741 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974).
· cites it 6× “On June 7, 1954, appellant filed an affidavit of renewal on said judgment pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1612. Thereafter, appellant filed additional affidavits of renewal of the said judgment on May 26, 1959, April 23, 1964 and May 12, 1969.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(A) — 9 cases
Crye v. Edwards, 873 P.2d 665 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
“§ 12-155KB) provides: No execution or other process shall be issued upon a judgment after the expiration of five years from the date of its entry unless the judgment is renewed by affidavit or process pursuant to § 12-1612 or an action is brought thereon within five years from…”
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
“Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
JC Penney v. Lane, 3 P.3d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“”) section 12-1612. By mistake, the affidavit referred to the judgment as a Maricopa County judgment rather than a Coconino County judgment, stated that the judgment was recorded in the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder rather than the Coconino County Recorder, and named…”
Hall v. World Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 943 P.2d 855 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
“section 12-1612. Pursuant to A.R.S. section 12-1611, Hall’s filing of an action on the California judgment renewed the judgment.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(B) — 15 cases
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
“Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
Lachter v. Smith, 101 P.3d 637 (Ariz. 2004).
“We assume, by implication, that A.R.S. § 12-1612, which provides the mechanism for filing subsequent renewal affidavits, would also qualify as an "applicable nonbankruptcy law” that may be stayed by bankruptcy proceedings.”
State ex rel. Indus. Comm'n v. Galloway, 230 P.3d 708 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Section 12-1551(B) expressly provides two means to extend the period in which to execute the judgment: either by affidavit or process pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1612, or by bringing an action on the judgment within the five-year period.”
JC Penney v. Lane, 3 P.3d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“”) section 12-1612. By mistake, the affidavit referred to the judgment as a Maricopa County judgment rather than a Coconino County judgment, stated that the judgment was recorded in the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder rather than the Coconino County Recorder, and named…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(B)(1) — 1 case
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
“Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(B)(2) — 1 case
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
“Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(D) — 4 cases
Hall v. World Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 943 P.2d 855 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).
“section 12-1612. Pursuant to A.R.S. section 12-1611, Hall’s filing of an action on the California judgment renewed the judgment.”
JC Penney v. Lane, 3 P.3d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“”) section 12-1612. By mistake, the affidavit referred to the judgment as a Maricopa County judgment rather than a Coconino County judgment, stated that the judgment was recorded in the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder rather than the Coconino County Recorder, and named…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(E) — 4 cases
Fid. Nat'l Fin., Inc. v. Friedman, 855 F. Supp. 2d 948 (D. Ariz. 2012).
“Accordingly, that 2007 Certification did not serve the essential purpose of A.R.S. § 12-1612(B — notice. Those omissions had nothing to do with this court’s intent.”
Lachter v. Smith, 101 P.3d 637 (Ariz. 2004).
“We assume, by implication, that A.R.S. § 12-1612, which provides the mechanism for filing subsequent renewal affidavits, would also qualify as an "applicable nonbankruptcy law” that may be stayed by bankruptcy proceedings.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1612(F) — 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.