Category: Civil Litigation

Joint and Several Liability

The legal doctrine of joint and several liability is a fundamental concept in tort law and contract law that plays a crucial role in determining who is responsible for damages when multiple parties are involved in a legal dispute. This doctrine is often applied when harm or injury occurs due to the actions or negligence of more than one party. In this blog post, we will delve into the concept of joint and several liability, understand its principles, and explore how it is applied in legal cases.

Understanding Joint and Several Liability

Joint and several liability is a legal doctrine that allows for multiple parties to be held collectively and individually responsible for a plaintiff’s injuries or damages. This means that in cases involving two or more defendants, the plaintiff can choose to pursue the entire judgment from one defendant or apportion the damages among multiple defendants, depending on their financial ability or degree of fault.

Key Elements of Joint and Several Liability

  1. Multiple Parties: Joint and several liability comes into play when there are multiple parties involved in a legal dispute. These parties can be individuals, businesses, or entities that share responsibility for the plaintiff’s harm.
  2. Individual Liability: Each party can be held individually liable for the full extent of the plaintiff’s damages. In other words, a plaintiff can seek to recover the entire amount from any one defendant, even if that defendant’s actions were not the sole cause of the harm.
  3. Right to Contribution: Defendants who are held responsible for damages beyond their share can seek contribution from the other responsible parties. This means that if one defendant pays more than their fair share of the damages, they can later recover the excess amount from the co-defendants.
  4. Several Liability: In cases where the plaintiff chooses to apportion damages among multiple defendants, each defendant will be held liable only for their share of the damages. This approach is known as several liability, and it ensures that defendants are responsible for the damages they caused.

Applications of Joint and Several Liability

  1. Personal Injury Cases: Joint and several liability is commonly used in personal injury cases where multiple parties may be at fault for an accident. For example, in a car accident involving a negligent driver and a municipality with poorly maintained roads, the injured party may choose to recover damages from either the driver, the municipality, or both, depending on the circumstances.
  2. Product Liability: In product liability cases, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers may be held jointly and severally liable if a defective product causes harm to a consumer. The injured party can choose to sue any or all of the responsible parties.
  3. Contract Disputes: Joint and several liability can also arise in contract disputes. For instance, if multiple parties are jointly responsible for fulfilling the terms of a contract and one party fails to meet their obligations, the innocent party may seek to recover the full amount of damages from any or all of the defaulting parties.

Conclusion

Joint and several liability is a legal doctrine that serves to ensure that plaintiffs are adequately compensated when they suffer harm due to the actions or negligence of multiple parties. It provides flexibility in legal proceedings, allowing plaintiffs to seek recourse from the party or parties best able to satisfy the judgment. At the same time, it holds all responsible parties accountable for their contributions to the plaintiff’s injuries or damages. Understanding this doctrine is essential for individuals, legal practitioners, and businesses alike, as it has far-reaching implications in various areas of law, including tort law and contract law.

If you are looking for an experienced litigator, then contact the Dunaway Law Group at 480-702-1608 or message us HERE.

The Dunaway Law Group provides this information as a service to clients and other friends for educational purposes only. It should not be construed or relied on as legal advice and does not create a lawyer-client or attorney-prospective client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking advice from professional advisers. Additionally, this Firm limits its practice to the states of Arizona and New York.

Statute of Frauds

What is the Statute of Frauds?

The Statute of Frauds is a legal doctrine that requires certain types of real estate contracts be in writing to be legally enforceable. Its primary purpose is to prevent fraudulent claims and misunderstandings arising from verbal agreements and to create a clear and verifiable record of important contractual obligations. In Arizona, the Statute of Frauds for real property transactions is governed by A.R.S. § 44-101.

Real Property Transactions Covered by the Statute of Frauds in Arizona

The Arizona Statute of Frauds mandates that contracts involving the sale, exchange, or lease of real property, or any interest in real property, must be in writing to be legally enforceable. This encompasses a wide range of real estate transactions, including but not limited to:

  1. Sales of Land and Homes: Any agreement to buy or sell a piece of land or a residential property, whether it’s a single-family home or a condominium, must be documented in writing to be legally binding.
  2. Lease Agreements: If you’re entering into a lease agreement for real property, such as leasing a commercial space or residential unit for a term exceeding one year, it must also be in writing to be enforceable.
  3. Real Estate Option Contracts: Option contracts, which give one party the right to buy or sell real property at a specified price within a specified timeframe, must be in writing to be legally valid.

Key Elements of a Valid Written Agreement

To comply with the Statute of Frauds in Arizona, a written agreement related to real property transactions must include certain key elements:

  1. Identification of the Parties: The names and addresses of all parties involved in the agreement must be clearly stated.
  2. Property Description: A detailed description of the real property being transacted, including its legal description, address, and any relevant parcel or tax identification numbers, should be included.
  3. Terms and Conditions: The terms of the agreement, including the purchase price, financing arrangements, and any contingencies or conditions, should be spelled out.
  4. Signatures: The written document should be signed by all parties involved. Signatures are a critical component of demonstrating consent and intention to be bound by the contract.

Implications of Non-Compliance with the Statute of Frauds

Failing to adhere to the Statute of Frauds can have significant consequences. A contract that doesn’t meet the statutory requirements is generally unenforceable in a court of law. This means that parties may not be able to enforce their rights, collect damages, or compel performance if the contract is solely oral or inadequately documented.

Seek Legal Guidance

In conclusion, the Statute of Frauds in Arizona is a fundamental legal doctrine that underscores the importance of written agreements in real property transactions. If you need assistance with a real property transaction or dispute then contact the Dunaway Law Group at 480-702-1608 or message us HERE.

* These blog posts are not intended, nor shall they be deemed to render legal advice. Reading these blog post does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor shall it impose an obligation on the part of the law firm to respond to further inquiry. The Dunaway Law Group limits its practice to the states of Arizona and New York.

Motion for Summary Judgment

What is a Motion for Summary Judgment?

A Motion for Summary Judgment is a pleading used in civil lawsuits.

filed where a party is asking the judge to rule the issues in dispute without the need for a trial. This is known as a summary judgment, in that it summarily ends the case before trial. The purpose of a trial is to have somebody — the judge or the jury — decide what the facts are. If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial.

This blogpost will discuss when a Motion for Summary Judgment is used in a lawsuit and how to defend against it.

When is a Motion for Summary Judgment used?

A Motion for Summary Judgment is used when there is no genuine dispute of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In other words, the party filing the motion is saying that there are no disputed facts that would require a trial, and the court can rule in their favor without the need for a trial.

A Motion for Summary Judgment is typically filed after the discovery process is completed, and all relevant evidence has been gathered. It is important to note that the moving party has the burden of showing that there is no genuine dispute of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. If the moving party meets this burden, the court will grant the motion, and the case will be dismissed or the claim(s) in question will be dismissed.

There must be “no genuine issues of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law”. This means that the undisputed facts presented in a particular case entitle one side to win because of the existing law relating to that issue.

If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial. Instead the party who believes that the undisputed facts compel a ruling in his or her favor will file a motion for summary judgment. The motion asks the court to consider the undisputed facts and apply the law to them, and argues that the law requires a judgment for the party bringing the motion.

When considering a Motion for Summary Judgment, judges must view all “the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.” Rowland v. Kellogg Brown and Root Inc. Under Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure 56(c), a judgment can be entered only if the court finds that no genuine issues of material fact exist. If issues of material fact exist then the Motion for Summary Judgment should be dismissed in its entirety.

Courts are cautioned not to use summary judgment proceedings as a substitute for trials, the motion should be granted if the facts produced in support of the claim or defense have so little probative value, given the quantum of evidence required, that reasonable people could not agree with the conclusion advanced by the proponent of the claim or defense.

The burden of persuasion on the party seeking summary judgment is heavy and if there is any genuine issue as to a material factual issue is present, the motion should be denied.

Why File a motion for Summary Judgment?

Just because the opposing party filed a Motion for Summary Judgment it doesn’t mean that you did something wrong or they have an extraordinarily strong case where the judge will enter judgment in their favor without even going to trial.

It is quite common for Motions for Summary Judgment to be filed in Arizona cases. In part because a judge can rule on just one aspect of the case. This will allow the Movant to “chip away at the edges” of the lawsuit to see if they can get any of the claims for relief awarded.

Statement of Facts and Affidavit

A Statement of Facts and Affidavit(s) are submitted along with the Motion for Summary Judgment.

  • Statement of Facts– For the movant party, (person filing the MSJ) they must file a Statement of Facts providing the facts of the situation as they see them.
    • Supporting Documents-In addition to just stating the “facts”, each Party must provide documentation that supports their statement facts. When it decides a motion for summary judgment, the court may only consider facts in the pretrial record, such as deposition testimony, affidavits, answers to written discovery requests, documents, etc. It cannot decide which side is more credible than the other. If the court has concerns about the credibility of witnesses or which side to believe, the case should be resolved in a trial.
  • Affidavit in Support– Both Parties must file an affidavit swearing that their statements are true.

responding to the motion

A response to the Motion for Summary Judgment must be filed within 30 days of receiving the motion. A response gives a party the opportunity to respond to the allegations made in the Motion for Summary Judgment. As part of the response, a statement of facts and affidavit must also be filed. Similar to the opposing party’s statement of facts, the respondent must cite a source for every statement made to the court. Doing this is incredibly tedious and time consuming!

How to defend against a Motion for Summary Judgment?

When facing a Motion for Summary Judgment, the non-moving party has a few options for defending against it. Firstly, the non-moving party can argue that there are genuine disputes of material fact that require a trial. To do this, the non-moving party must point to specific evidence that creates a genuine dispute of material fact.

Secondly, the non-moving party can argue that the moving party is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This may be because the moving party has not met their burden of proof or because the law is not clear on the issue in question.

Finally, the non-moving party can argue that the court should deny the Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. This means that the court would not dismiss the case or claim(s) at this time, but rather, would allow the case to proceed to trial. This option is typically used when the non-moving party needs more time to conduct discovery or gather evidence.

RULING ON THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

There are essentially three way a Judge can rule.

  1. The Arizona Judge may rule 100% against the Party filed the Motion for Summary Judgement. If the Judge rules completely against the moving Party then the case will continue towards trial as if the Motion for Summary Judgment had never been filed!
  2. The Arizona Judge may grant a partial summary judgment. Meaning the Judge ruled in favor of the moving Party on some of their claims but not on all of them. If a partial summary judgment is awarded, then a decision is made on the claims involved without holding a trial but the the remaining issues will continue towards trial.  
  3. The Arizona Judge may rule 100% in favor of the Party who filed the Motion for Summary Judgment. If this happens, if the Judge rules completely in favor of the party who filed the Motion for Summary Judgment then it is deemed to be a final judgment from which a party may appeal. On appeal, the appellate court can reverse the summary judgment and reinstate the claim in the Superior Court. However, this is rarely done because most summary judgments are upheld on appeal. Lastly, depending on the type of case, the winning party will likely be awarded their attorneys’ fees and costs.

In conclusion, the legal doctrine of Motion for Summary Judgment is an important tool for litigators in civil cases. It allows parties to avoid a trial when there are no genuine disputes of material fact and one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. However, when facing a Motion for Summary Judgment, the non-moving party has options for defending against it. They can argue that there are genuine disputes of material fact, that the moving party is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law, or that the court should deny the Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice. Ultimately, it is up to the court to determine whether a Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted or denied.

If you need help from an Arizona attorney then contact the Dunaway Law Group at or 480-702-1610 or by sending us a message HERE.

The Dunaway Law Group provides this information as a service to clients and other friends for educational purposes only. It should not be construed or relied on as legal advice or to create a lawyer-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking advice from professional advisers. The Firm limits its practice to the States of Arizona and New York.

Discovery in Litigation

What is Discovery of Evidence?

During a lawsuit, each party has the opportunity to request formal “discovery” from the opposing party. The Discovery process is accomplished in a variety of ways, one is to send the opposing party a formal set of requests. These requests each seek different types of information from the opposing party.  

stack of legal documents

Uniform and non-uniform Interrogatories:

Uniform interrogatories are a series of questions that are listed in the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Depending on the type of case there is a set of different questions for the opposing party.

Non-uniform interrogatories are questions written by one party to a lawsuit. They send the questions to the opposing party and wait their response.

For example, a non-uniform interrogatory might ask, “Explain in detail why you did not make the payments as agreed”.

Request for Admissions:

“Requests for Admissions” allow one party to present the opposing party with statements that they must either Admit or Deny. They are written in a way so that the responding party must Admit the statement. If the responding party does not respond in the affirmative then they must provide a detailed explanation of why they denied the statement.

For example, a Request for Admissions could state,
“Admit that you entered into a written contract with the Plaintiff”.
“Admit that under the contract you were to pay the Plaintiff $5,000 a month.” “Admit that you did not pay the Plaintiff $5,000 per month”.

A party might deny one of the above statements of admissions by responding. “I deny that I was to pay Plaintiff $5,000 per month because I gave him a parcel of land as payment for the money borrowed.”

The effect of not responding to the Requests for Admissions is quite harsh. Under Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 36(a)(4) “A matter [request] is admitted unless, within 30 days after being served, the party to who the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written answer or objection addressed to the matter and signed by the party or its attorney.”

Why does it matter if the Requests for Admissions are deemed Admitted? Well, the party asking for the Admissions can say to the Judge, “Your honor, we’ve proven our case and you should rule in our favor. The Defendants admitted there was a written agreement to borrow money and they admitted that they did not pay back the money as agreed. [Refer to my example above].

Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 36(b) does allow a party to file a Motion asking the court for permission to withdraw or amend the admission. “Subject to Rule 16, the court may permit withdrawal or amendment if it would promote the presentation of the merits of the action and if the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the action on its merits.”

Request for Documents:

We are given the opportunity to request up to 10 different sets of documents from the opposing party. In Arizona, in the Rule 34 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the responding party has 30 days to respond to the request for production of documents.

Lastly, similar to 26.1 initial discovery statements. These discovery requests are not submitted to the Court. In fact, the Judge will never see this information unless specifically and formally introduced as evidence at trial. So don’t worry about impressing the judge, we are simply exchanging all relevant information with the opposing party.

If you need help from an experienced Arizona attorney, then contact the Dunaway Law Group at 480-702-1608 or message us HERE.

* The information provided is informational only, does not constitute legal advice, and will not create an attorney-client or attorney-prospective client relationship. Additionally, the Dunaway Law Group, PLC limits its practice to the State of Arizona.

Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement

Rule 26.1 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the parties to a lawsuit to exchange Initial Disclosure Statements within 30 (thirty) days of the defendant filing an Answer. These disclosure statements are often referred to as “Rule 26.1 Statements” or “Rule 26.1 Disclosures” for short.

Initial disclosure statements are not filed with the court but simply shared with the opposing party as part of the discovery process. Arizona courts wish for the parties to avoid “trial by ambush”. That is, that want parties to share whatever information that exists with the opposing party. In theory this is supposed to increase the likelihood of parties settling without court intervention.

What Must the Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement Contain?

  1. Potential Trial Witness. The disclosure statement must list everyone who may testify at trial. Just because a person is listed it does not mean that they must later testify. However, if a person is not disclosed as a potential witness then they may not be called as a witness at trial. It simply gives the opposing party notice that you may be interested in having this person testify at the trial and what they may be testifying about.
  2. A list of other people with knowledge. The disclosure statement must also list persons who will not be called as trial witnesses, but may have information relevant to the subject of the lawsuit.
  3. Written Statements. The disclosure statement must provide a list of any written or recorded statements within their possession. 
  4. All forms of Communication and Information. Each party must disclose all relevant communication. This includes emails and text messages. Including electronically stored documents. 
  5. List of all other Documents. The disclosure statement must include all other relevant documents that are known to exist, regardless of whether or not they are favorable to your case. 

Any time new information is discovered it must disclosed to the opposing party. An “amended” disclosure statement is created and then provided to the other party.

If you need help from an experienced Arizona attorney, then contact the Dunaway Law Group at 480-702-1608 or message us HERE.

* The information provided is informational only, does not constitute legal advice, and will not create an attorney-client or attorney-prospective client relationship. Additionally, the Dunaway Law Group, PLC limits its practice to the states of Arizona and New York.