Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409 (2026)

Change of judge; grounds; affidavit

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. If either party to a civil action in a superior court files an affidavit alleging any of the grounds specified in subsection B, the judge shall at once transfer the action to another division of the court if there is more than one division, or shall request a judge of the superior court of another county to preside at the trial of the action.

B. Grounds which may be alleged as provided in subsection A for change of judge are:

1. That the judge has been engaged as counsel in the action prior to appointment or election as judge.

2. That the judge is otherwise interested in the action.

3. That the judge is of kin or related to either party to the action.

4. That the judge is a material witness in the action.

5. That the party filing the affidavit has cause to believe and does believe that on account of the bias, prejudice, or interest of the judge he cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 59 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: In the Matter of Lisa M. Aubuchon, 309 P.3d 886 (Ariz. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In the Matter of Lisa M. Aubuchon, 309 P.3d 886 (Ariz. 2013). · cites it 5× “¶ 13 A party who seeks to remove the presiding disciplinary judge from a case must file an affidavit demonstrating grounds set forth in AR.S. § 12-409(B). Ariz. R. Sup.Ct. 51(d).”

Chalpin v. Mobile Gardens, Inc., 501 P.2d 407 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 24× “Accordingly the determination of this issue must be governed by a construction of A.R.S. 12-409 (A). . ." We adopt this conclusion on a factual basis, and therefore, limit our consideration of the issues presented here as if they *234 arose under A.”

Smith v. Smith, 564 P.2d 1266 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 6× “The first is that Judge Heineman improperly denied the first affidavit of bias and prejudice as this determination under A.R.S. § 12-409 where actual bias is alleged must be made by another judge.”

Del Castillo v. Wells, 523 P.2d 92 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 20× “They also sought to change the trial judge by filing an affidavit of bias and prejudice pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-409 and demanded a trial by jury.”

Dunn v. Superior Court, 772 P.2d 1164 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 8× “Petitioners argue that the civil presiding judge exceeded his authority by dishonoring the notice, thereby in effect overruling *315 Judge Howe's order honoring the notice. They contend that Judge Martone's administrative role as presiding civil judge limits his discretion to…”

Nancy Bourke v. Roger H. Contreras, 556 P.3d 291 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 18× “2014) (judicial bias argument waived by failure to request disqualification under A.R.S. § 12-409 or in motion for reconsideration); § 12-409; Ariz.”

Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C., 276 P.3d 11 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “42(f)(2) (providing for change of judge for cause); A.R.S. § 12-409(B)(5) (providing that one ground for requesting a change of judge for cause is if “the party filing the affidavit has cause to believe and does believe that on account of the bias, prejudice, or interest of the…”

John Munic Enter., Inc. v. Laos, 326 P.3d 279 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Trial Court Prejudice ¶ 4 The Laoses first argue the trial court was biased or prejudiced against them because it looked into other eases involving the Laoses pending on the superior court’s docket.”

Hordyk v. Farley, 382 P.2d 668 (Ariz. 1963). · cites it 8× “Petitioners filed an affidavit of bias and prejudice pursuant to the provisions of A.R.S. § 12-409 and also filed a motion for leave to amend their answer.”

State v. Hill, 848 P.2d 1375 (Ariz. 1993). · cites it 2× “cannot be had by reason of the interest or prejudice of the assigned judge”); A.R.S. § 12-409(B) (grounds for change of judge include party’s inability to obtain fair and impartial trial because of bias, prejudice, or interest of judge).”

Brush Wellman, Inc. v. Lee, 996 P.2d 1248 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “, which has the same origins as § 12-409, limits the number of allowable changes of venue or judge as follows: A.”

Jimenez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 79 P.3d 673 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 12-409(B); Ariz. R. Civ. P. 42(f)(2)(D), 16 A.”

Show all 59 citing cases →

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409(A) — 3 cases

Chalpin v. Mobile Gardens, Inc., 501 P.2d 407 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). “Accordingly the determination of this issue must be governed by a construction of A.R.S. 12-409 (A). . ." We adopt this conclusion on a factual basis, and therefore, limit our consideration of the issues presented here as if they *234 arose under A.”

Lakeside v. Meyers (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

Rosales Perez v. Hon. martin/baldwin (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409(B) — 9 cases

In the Matter of Lisa M. Aubuchon, 309 P.3d 886 (Ariz. 2013). “¶ 13 A party who seeks to remove the presiding disciplinary judge from a case must file an affidavit demonstrating grounds set forth in AR.S. § 12-409(B). Ariz. R. Sup.Ct. 51(d).”

State v. Hill, 848 P.2d 1375 (Ariz. 1993). “cannot be had by reason of the interest or prejudice of the assigned judge”); A.R.S. § 12-409(B) (grounds for change of judge include party’s inability to obtain fair and impartial trial because of bias, prejudice, or interest of judge).”

Jimenez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 79 P.3d 673 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “See A.R.S. § 12-409(B); Ariz. R. Civ. P. 42(f)(2)(D), 16 A.”

Smith v. Smith, 564 P.2d 1266 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). “The first is that Judge Heineman improperly denied the first affidavit of bias and prejudice as this determination under A.R.S. § 12-409 where actual bias is alleged must be made by another judge.”

Bradford Lund v. Hon. Myers, 305 P.3d 374 (Ariz. 2013).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409(B)(2) — 1 case

Nancy Bourke v. Roger H. Contreras, 556 P.3d 291 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). “2014) (judicial bias argument waived by failure to request disqualification under A.R.S. § 12-409 or in motion for reconsideration); § 12-409; Ariz.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409(B)(5) — 10 cases

Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C., 276 P.3d 11 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “42(f)(2) (providing for change of judge for cause); A.R.S. § 12-409(B)(5) (providing that one ground for requesting a change of judge for cause is if “the party filing the affidavit has cause to believe and does believe that on account of the bias, prejudice, or interest of the…”

San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Bolton, 977 P.2d 790 (Ariz. 1999).

Roman Catholic Church v. Hon bluff/lee (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-409(C) — 1 case

Graville v. Dodge, 985 P.2d 604 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).

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.