Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-675 (2026)

Summons; form; answer

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. On filing of the statement of contest, the clerk of the superior court shall issue a summons to be served on the contestee as summons in civil actions are served, except it shall require the contestee to file an answer to the statement with the clerk of the court within five days after service of the summons, exclusive of the day of service. If the answer is not filed within such period, the court shall proceed with the hearing of the contest ex parte. If the contest is on an initiative or referred measure, a proposed constitutional amendment, or other proposition or question submitted, which has been declared carried, the summons shall be served on the governor and attorney general who may appear and answer the statement of contest, or, by leave of court, an elector of the state may intervene and defend the contest.

B. If the election of a person declared elected is contested, the summons shall be in substantially the following form:

In the superior court of the state of Arizona in and for the county of

Contestant.

vs.

Contestee.

Summons.

To the above named contestee;

You are hereby notified that a resident of county, state of Arizona, has on this day filed in this court a statement of contest wherein he contests your election to the office of at the election held on the day of , 20 , a copy of which statement accompanies this summons.

You are therefore required to file your answer to said statement with the clerk of this court within five days after the service of this summons on you exclusive of the day of service or the court will proceed with the hearing of such contest ex parte.

Given under my hand and the seal of said court this day of , 20 .

Clerk of said court.

C. If the contest is on an initiative or referred measure, a proposed constitutional amendment, or other proposition or question submitted, which has been declared carried, the summons shall be in substantially the following form:

In the superior court of the state of Arizona in and for the county of .

In the matter of the contest of a certain constitutional amendment (or proposition, describing it briefly, as the case may be.)

To the honorable , governor, and the honorable , attorney general of the state of Arizona:

You are hereby notified that residing at in the county of , state of Arizona, has this day filed with the clerk of this court a statement wherein he contests the election by which the constitutional amendment (or proposition briefly describing it) was declared to have been carried. A copy of this statement is attached and served on you. You are further notified that unless an answer to this statement is filed within five days after the service of this summons on you the court will proceed with the hearing of this contest ex parte.

Given under my hand and the seal of said court this day of , 20 .

Clerk of said court.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2024 · leading case: Prutch v. Town of Quartzsite, 296 P.3d 94 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Prutch v. Town of Quartzsite, 296 P.3d 94 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Motions for Entry of Default and to Proceed Ex Parte ¶ 16 Prutch next argues that the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motions for entry of default and to proceed ex parte because Quartzsite did not answer the complaint pursuant to § 16-675(A). Section 16-675(A)…”

Daniel Lachance, Henry Stephen Conroy v. Cnty. of Cochise Cochise Cnty. Jail Dist. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “COUNTY OF COCHISE Opinion of the Court ¶45 In addition, the county attorney did not fail to file a timely answer under Section 16-675. Under that statute, once a statement of contest has been filed and the summons has been served, the opposing party has five days to file an…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-675(A) — 2 cases

Prutch v. Town of Quartzsite, 296 P.3d 94 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “Motions for Entry of Default and to Proceed Ex Parte ¶ 16 Prutch next argues that the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motions for entry of default and to proceed ex parte because Quartzsite did not answer the complaint pursuant to § 16-675(A). Section 16-675(A)…”

Daniel Lachance, Henry Stephen Conroy v. Cnty. of Cochise Cochise Cnty. Jail Dist. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). “COUNTY OF COCHISE Opinion of the Court ¶45 In addition, the county attorney did not fail to file a timely answer under Section 16-675. Under that statute, once a statement of contest has been filed and the summons has been served, the opposing party has five days to file an…”

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.