Rule 34 - Continuances and Scheduling Conflicts(a)Motion to Continue; Unavailability of a Witness or Party. On a motion to continue a trial, hearing, or conference based on the unavailability of a party or witness, the party requesting the continuance must show: (1) why the testimony of the party or witness is material;(2) when the party learned of the party's or witness's unavailability;(3) the party's diligence and efforts in attempting to obtain the party's or witness's testimony; and(4) the postponement is for good cause and not for delay.(b)Scheduling Conflicts Between Courts.(1)Notice to the Courts and Counsel. Upon learning of a scheduling conflict between a trial, hearing, or conference in superior court and another trial or hearing in state or federal court, counsel must promptly notify the affected judges and counsel.(2)Resolving a Conflict. Upon being notified of a scheduling conflict, the respective judges should confer with each other and counsel to resolve the conflict. Neither federal nor state court actions have priority in scheduling. A court may consider the following factors in resolving the conflict: (A) whether the other action is a criminal matter, and, if so, whether postponement of that matter will deprive a defendant of a speedy trial;(B) each action's relative length, urgency, or importance;(C) whether the conflicting trials or hearings involve out-of-town witnesses, parties, or counsel;(D) the actions' respective filing dates;(E) which action was first set for trial;(F) any priority granted by rule or statute; and(G) any other pertinent factor.(3)Inter-Division Conflicts. Conflicts in scheduling between divisions of the same court may be governed by local rule or general order.(c) Motion to Continue; Other Good Cause. On a motion to continue a trial, hearing, or conference based on other good cause, the party requesting the continuance must show: (1) the basis for the good cause for a continuance;(2) when the party learned of the circumstance(s) which form(s) the basis for the good cause and why the motion was not or could not have been brought at an earlier date;(3) the party's diligence and efforts in attempting to avoid the circumstance(s) which form(s) the good cause for the continuance;(4) the prejudice which may be caused to either party or any children at issue in the action by granting the continuance and by denying the continuance; and(5) the continuance is sought in good faith and not for delay or another improper purpose.(d)Duty to Consult. Before filing a motion to continue a trial, hearing, or conference, the moving party must consult with other parties in the case and advise the court whether the other parties object to the motion. This requirement does not apply if: (1) there is a current court order prohibiting contact between the parties, a history of domestic violence between the parties, or an allegation of domestic violence; and(2) the alleged victim of the domestic violence is self-represented.Ariz. R. Fam. Law. proc. 34
Added Oct. 19, 2005, effective 1/1/2006. Amended Sept. 5, 2007, effective 1/1/2008;9/16/2008, effective 1/1/2009; amended effective1/1/2019; amended Aug. 29, 2022, effective 1/1/2023; amended Aug. 24, 2023, effective 1/1/2024.