Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-804 (2026)

Time for instituting proceedings

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

Proceedings to establish the paternity of the child may be instituted during the pregnancy of the mother or after the birth of the child. The court shall dismiss any proceeding that is barred pursuant to section 8-106, subsection J. For the purposes of establishing a duty to pay support or past support, the proceedings must be instituted before the child's eighteenth birthday.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: David C., Kim C. v. Alexis S., A.C., 375 P.3d 945 (Ariz. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
David C., Kim C. v. Alexis S., A.C., 375 P.3d 945 (Ariz. 2016). · cites it 2× “This notice gives the father the opportunity to file an action to establish his paternity and protect his right to parent the child.”
Bill W. Castillo v. Thania N. Lazo, 386 P.3d 839 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “¶ 8 But in some circumstances, the time period to bring a paternity action is more limited.”
Aranda v. Cardenas, 159 P.3d 76 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “” § 25-804. Given Aranda’s assertion that both he and Lopez publicly acknowledged his paternity before Lopez’s death, Aranda would have had no reason to seek a paternity determination during the pregnancy.”
Thomas Cox v. Hon. ponce/makayla Esplin, 491 P.3d 1109 (Ariz. 2021). · cites it 3× “PONCE/ESPLIN Opinion of the Court ¶11 In addition, A.R.S. § 25-804 requires the trial court to “dismiss any proceeding that is barred pursuant to § 8-106, subsection J.”
In Re Termination of Parental Rights as to B.B. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 3× “Section 8-106(J), understood in the context of A.R.S. § 25-804, gives substance to that warning: A potential father who fails to file a paternity action and who does not serve the mother within thirty days after completion of service on the potential father .”
Aranda v. Cardenas, M.D. Nes Arizona (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “” § 25-804. Given Aranda’s assertion that both he and Lopez publicly acknowledged his paternity before Lopez’s death, Aranda would have had no reason to seek a paternity determination during the pregnancy.”
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.