In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, "small claims division" means a forum in justice courts in which procedures shall allow the inexpensive, speedy and informal resolution of small claims.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases, 1965–2020 · leading case:
Peterson v. Newton, 307 P.3d 1020 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
Peterson v. Newton, 307 P.3d 1020 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 22-501. The court has jurisdiction over “all civil actions in which the debt, damage, tort, injury or value of the personal property claims either by plaintiff or defendant does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollarS[.”
Clusiau v. Clusiau Enter., Inc., 236 P.3d 1194 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. §§ 22-501 (2002), -502 (2002). Small claims court “has concurrent original jurisdiction with the justice court,” inter alia, over civil actions involving claims not exceeding $2,500.”
Jacobson v. Superior Court, 402 P.2d 1018 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1965).
· cites it 2× “A review of the statutes indicates that each justice of the peace shall be ex officio coroner within his precinct, A.R.S. § 22-501, and each justice of the peace within a county may preside in any other precinct within the county in the absence, illness, inability to act or upon…”
Hastings v. Grundy (D. Ariz. 2020).
· cites it 2× “23 at 3), but this approach would run afoul of the justice court’s “stated purpose of allowing the 27 inexpensive, speedy, and final resolution of legal disputes, A.R.S. § 22-501, as well as Arizona’s longstanding presumption against splitting of claims.”
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.