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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-503 (2026)

Tacking of disabilities prohibited

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

The period of limitation shall not be extended by the connection of one disability with another. When the law of limitation begins to run it shall continue to run notwithstanding a supervening disability of the party entitled to sue or liable to be sued.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1951–2018 · leading case: Est. of DeSela v. Prescott Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1, 228 P.3d 938 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Est. of DeSela v. Prescott Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1, 228 P.3d 938 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “At oral argument, Defendants raised A.R.S. § 12-503 (2003) for the first time.”
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Frohmiller, 227 P.2d 1007 (Ariz. 1951). · cites it 5× “The question presented is whether attorneys’ fees are included within the term “all damages” as-used in Section 12-503, A.C.A. 1939, a statute first enacted half a century ago,.”
City Ctr. Exec. Plaza, LLC v. Jantzen, 344 P.3d 339 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “2d 1007, 1009 (1951) (holding that attorneys’ fees were not damages within meaning of A.R.S. § 12-503); see also Assyia v. *42 State Farm Mut.”
Smith v. MacDougall, 676 P.2d 656 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 3× “" "§ 12-503. Tacking of disabilities prohibited The period of limitation shall not be extended by the connection of one disability with another.”
Doe v. Roe, 931 P.2d 1115 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “section 12-503 (1992). 1. Disability of Unsound Mind Arizona law recognizes that a person who is of "unsound mind" at the time a cause of action accrues is under a legal disability, and the statute of limitations does not begin to run until removal of that disability.”
Kopacz v. Banner Health, 425 P.3d 586 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “§ 12-502; see also A.R.S. § 12-503 (2018) (once statute of limitations begins to run, it continues to run "notwithstanding a supervening disability").”
Floyd v. Donahue, 923 P.2d 875 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “section 12-503 (1992). 3 . Floyd argues that discovery of her cause of action was triggered by her son's reporting that Donahue told him not to tell his mother about something.”
Camelback Plaza Dev., L.C. v. Hard Rock Café Int'l (Phoenix), Inc., 25 P.3d 8 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “section 12-503 [now section 35-213] authorizes payment of “all damages” incurred by a prevailing defendant in a lawsuit filed to recover wrongfully paid state moneys, it does not authorize an award of attorneys’ fees.”
Chula Vista Homeowners Ass'n v. Irwin, 426 P.3d 1228 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “2d 1007 (attorney fees are not damages for purposes of A.R.S. § 12-503 ), Assyia v. State Farm Mut.”
Smith v. MacDougall, 676 P.2d 656 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 3× “” “§ 12-503. Tacking of disabilities prohibited The period of limitation shall not be extended by the connection of one disability with another.”
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.