Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 40
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 40-255 (2026)

Precedence of actions

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

All actions and proceedings to which the commission or the state is a party, or in which the attorney general has been allowed to intervene, and in which any question arises under this title, or under or concerning any order or decision of the commission, shall be preferred and shall be heard and determined in preference to other civil matters except election actions.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1963–2025 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Church v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 382 P.2d 222 (Ariz. 1963).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Church v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 382 P.2d 222 (Ariz. 1963). · cites it 2× “Read together, these sections indicate speed, not delay, is the legislative mandate where judicial review is sought of action by the commission.”
Mountain States, Etc. v. Ariz. Corp. Com'n, 604 P.2d 1144 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “If Arizona judicial decisions setting aside a rate increase were to be given prospective application in all cases, a determined Commission could theoretically perpetuate an unlawful rate indefinitely by approving anew the unlawful rate following each judicial determination.”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n, 604 P.2d 1144 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “If Arizona judicial decisions setting aside a rate increase were to be given prospective application in all cases, a determined Commission could theoretically perpetuate an unlawful rate indefinitely by approving anew the unlawful rate following each judicial determination.”
Stevens v. Indus. Comm'n, 451 P.2d 874 (Ariz. 1969). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 40-255, in further expression of the legislature’s intent that judicial review be expeditiously obtained, gives such actions precedence over other civil matters except election actions.”
Williams v. State Ex Rel. Smith, 408 P.2d 224 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1965). “Pursuant to Section 40-255 A.R.S. and upon motion duly made, this cause was given priority status and advanced on our calendar.”
Arizona Corp. Comm'n v. Superior Court, 521 P.2d 154 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). “§ 40-255. Respondent argues that an appeal from the denial of a motion for rehearing would be premature, since the Corporation Commission had the power to revise its decision until the last motion for rehearing is denied.”
ruco/thaler v. Acc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 40-255 (stating that when the Commission is a party, the case “shall be preferred and shall be heard and determined in preference to other civil matters except election actions”).”
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.