Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 23
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-1066 (2026)

Minor or incapacitated claimant; appointment of guardian ad litem; procedure

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

A. When it appears to the commission that a claimant for compensation or death benefits is a minor or incapacitated person, the commission, on motion of any party to the proceedings or on its own motion, may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the best interests of the minor or incapacitated person, in accordance with the terms, conditions and rules of the commission and this chapter. If required by the commission, the guardian ad litem shall give bond in the form and character required by law from a guardian ad litem appointed by the superior court, and in such amount as the commission determines. The bond shall be approved by the commission, and the guardian ad litem shall not be discharged from liability until the guardian ad litem files an account with the commission or with the superior court in the county in which the minor or incapacitated person resides, and until the account, after due notice, is approved.

B. The guardian ad litem shall receive compensation for the guardian ad litem's services as is fixed and allowed by the commission or by the superior court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1966–2025 · leading case: Triste v. Indus. Comm'n, 544 P.2d 706 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Triste v. Indus. Comm'n, 544 P.2d 706 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 23-1066. There is no suggestion here that there is any conflict between the interests of the mother, the children, and the court-appointed conservator.”
Herman v. Indus. Comm'n, 414 P.2d 134 (Ariz. 1966). · cites it 2× “” No guardian was appointed for him as provided by A.R.S. § 23-1066: “A. When it appears to the commission that a claimant for compensation or death benefits is incompetent by reason of minority to prosecute his claim, the commission may, upon motion of any party to the…”
Tyree v. banner/banner (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). “”) section 23-1066. ¶12 Tyree did not appear at the time set for Dr.”
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.