Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 8
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-532 (2026)

Jurisdiction; dependency based termination

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

A. The juvenile court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions to terminate the parent-child relationship when the child involved is present in this state.

B. The juvenile court shall continue to have exclusive original jurisdiction when the juvenile is in the legal custody of the juvenile court although the physical placement of the child is in another state pursuant to court order.

C. This article does not apply to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to article 11 of this chapter except to the extent prescribed in section 8-863.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions, 367 P.3d 88 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions, 367 P.3d 88 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “See A.R.S. § 8-532 (court has jurisdiction to decide severance petition when child in state).”
Bobby G. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 200 P.3d 1003 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 5× “Section 8-532 states: “This article [article 2] does not apply to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to chapter 10, article 4 of this title, except to the extent prescribed in § 8-863.”
Angel B. v. Vanessa J., 316 P.3d 1257 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “” AR.S. § 8-532. Under the UCCJEA, however, the Arizona superior court “shall recognize and enforce a child custody determination of a court of another state if the latter court exercised jurisdiction in substantial conformity with this chapter.”
Adrian E. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 158 P.3d 225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “And § 8-532(C) specifically states, with an exception not relevant here, that “article [2 of chapter 5] does not apply to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to chapter 10, article 4 of this title.”
Tammie J.C. v. Robert T.R., 2003 WI 61 (Wis. 2003). · cites it 2× “" Pointing to A.R.S. § 8-532, an Arizona statute requiring that a child at issue in a termination proceeding be present in the state, the Pima County Juvenile Court granted Tammie's motion, declining to exercise jurisdiction over an action to terminate Robert's parental rights.”
Mara M. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 38 P.3d 41 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “By her invocation of Rule 5(e)(2), the premise for Mara’s argument is that the adjudication of dependency was a final judgment.”
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Saf., 393 P.3d 930 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Although we have recognized that Article 5 of Title 8 is not applicable to the parental termination proceeding initiated by motion "except to the extent prescribed in § 8-863,” A.R.S. § 8-532(C); Adrian E., 215 Ariz. at 100, ¶ 13 , 158 P.”
In re the Appeal in Yavapai Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-9365, 759 P.2d 643 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “First, in determining the necessity of pretrial statements in juvenile proceedings, we recognize the exclusive original jurisdiction of the juvenile court in severance actions as established in A.R.S. § 8-532: A. The juvenile court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over…”
Matter of Appeal in Pima Cnty. Etc., 575 P.2d 310 (Ariz. 1978). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 8-532(A). Recently we have had occasion to discuss the distinction between lack of jurisdiction and nonexercise of jurisdiction.”
Matter of Juv. No. J-2255, 613 P.2d 304 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “CONTRERAS, P. J., Department C, and JACOBSON, J., concur.”
Morales v. Glenn, 560 P.2d 1234 (Ariz. 1977). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 8-532. The Probate Court does not have jurisdiction to award custody when custody by operation of the law, Woodford v.”
Matter of Guardianship of Mikrut, 858 P.2d 689 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Although guardianship proceedings in Arizona are heard in probate court, the juvenile court has exclusive jurisdiction over petitions to terminate the parent-child relationship.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-532(A) — 5 cases
Matter of Appeal in Pima Cnty. Etc., 575 P.2d 310 (Ariz. 1978). “A.R.S. § 8-532(A). Recently we have had occasion to discuss the distinction between lack of jurisdiction and nonexercise of jurisdiction.”
Clark v. Curran, 575 P.2d 310 (Ariz. 1978).
Tracy D. , Tarah D. v. Dcs, T.D. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
Michelle M. v. Loren C., R.H. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
Joslin G. v. Dcs (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-532(A)(1999) — 1 case
Mara M. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 38 P.3d 41 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). “By her invocation of Rule 5(e)(2), the premise for Mara’s argument is that the adjudication of dependency was a final judgment.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-532(C) — 5 cases
Bobby G. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 200 P.3d 1003 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “Section 8-532 states: “This article [article 2] does not apply to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to chapter 10, article 4 of this title, except to the extent prescribed in § 8-863.”
Adrian E. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 158 P.3d 225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “And § 8-532(C) specifically states, with an exception not relevant here, that “article [2 of chapter 5] does not apply to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to chapter 10, article 4 of this title.”
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Saf., 393 P.3d 930 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). “Although we have recognized that Article 5 of Title 8 is not applicable to the parental termination proceeding initiated by motion "except to the extent prescribed in § 8-863,” A.R.S. § 8-532(C); Adrian E., 215 Ariz. at 100, ¶ 13 , 158 P.”
Marianne N. v. dcs/o.N./i.T./a.G. (Ariz. 2017).
Bobby G. v. Ades & Allison G. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
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.