Ariz. R. Fam. Law. proc. 5

As amended through December 6, 2023

Rule 5 - Consolidation

(a)Scope of Consolidation.

(1)Generally. If pending cases involve a common child, common parties, or a common question of law or fact, the court may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters at issue, or it may consolidate the cases.

(2)Assigned Judge. The judge assigned to the first-filed case will hear a motion to consolidate.

(3)Other Orders. The court may enter orders under this rule to avoid unnecessary costs or delay or to serve the best interest of a minor child.

(4)Orders of Protection. The court may not consolidate a case involving an order of protection with a family law case but may conduct a joint hearing.

(b)Lowest Case Number. If the court consolidates two or more cases, the first-filed case number will be the controlling case number, and the clerk must file all further filings under that number only. Unless the court orders otherwise, consolidation is for all purposes and not only for conducting a hearing or trial.

(c)Duplicate Pleadings. If the court consolidates cases in which a party in one case has filed a petition that substantially responds to an opposing party's petition in another case, the party's petition will be treated as a response to the opposing party's petition, unless the court orders a further response.

Ariz. R. Fam. Law. proc. 5

Added Oct. 19, 2005, effective 1/1/2006; amended effective1/1/2019.

COMMENT TO 2019 AMENDMENT

States-like Arizona-that accept federal grant funds under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) cannot publish anything on the Internet that would reveal the name or location of a plaintiff in a protective order proceeding. To ensure that Arizona courts comply, effective January 1, 2017, Rule 123(g)(1)(E)(ii)-(iii), Rules of the Supreme Court, has incorporated language similar to the federal law.

VAWA does not prohibit consolidation of cases, but Rule 5 does. However, if a domestic relations case and a protective order case are joined for hearing, then the court must take great care to ensure that no references to the protective order are published on the court's public access website. A family law minute entry cannot refer to the existence of a protective order if the minute entry is available to the public on the Internet. The case record, even if it displays only case data, cannot include the plaintiff's surname, and even the case title must be redacted to shield the plaintiff's surname. There is a distinction between case information available on the Internet and case information available at the courthouse. A person asking to inspect the record at a courthouse will have access to the plaintiff's name in the protective order proceeding, and possibly that person's address, unless the court has made this information confidential.