IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA ____________________________________ In the Matter of: ) ) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FAST ) Administrative Order TRIAL AND ALTERNATIVE ) No. 2017 - 116 RESOLUTION (FASTAR) ) PILOT PROGRAM IN PIMA COUNTY ) ____________________________________) In December 2015, this Court established the Committee on Civil Justice Reform. The Committee was directed to develop recommendations, including rule amendments and pilot projects, to reduce the cost and time required to resolve civil cases in Arizona’s superior court. The Committee submitted its report containing fifteen proposals to the Arizona Judicial Council (AJC). The AJC approved all fifteen proposals. Proposal No. 12 recommends that the Court “implement a pilot program in Pima County under which plaintiffs can opt for a short trial in court instead of compulsory arbitration.” The Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in Pima County requested that this Court approve new rules to implement a pilot program in Pima County, called the Fast Trial and Alternative Resolution Program (“FASTAR”). In conjunction with implementation of the program, the Presiding Judge in Pima County requested this Court approve lowering of the jurisdictional limit of cases subject to arbitration in the Superior Court in Pima Country to one thousand dollars. The new court rules and lower jurisdictional limit establish the framework necessary to experiment with using short trials and an alternative resolution program instead of compulsory arbitration in cases in which the amount of money sought does not exceed $50,000. Therefore, pursuant to Article VI, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The FASTAR rules and forms (Attachment 1) are approved for use in the Superior Court in Pima County, effective November 1, 2017; 2. The jurisdictional limit for arbitration claims authorized by A.R.S. § 12-133 is established at one thousand dollars for Pima County for the duration of the pilot program; 3. The Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in Pima County is authorized to approve changes to or addition of forms as necessary to implement the FASTAR program; and 4. The pilot program will run from November 1, 2017, until October 31, 2020. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Superior Court in Pima County and the Administrative Office of the Courts monitor the pilot program during its three-year term. An annual progress report shall be submitted to the Arizona Judicial Council on or before December 1st beginning in 2018. Dated this 26th day of October, 2017. FOR THE COURT: ____________________________________ SCOTT BALES Chief Justice APPENDIX 1 Part One: Rules for the Fast Trial and Alternative Resolution Program (“FASTAR”) Rule 101. Fast Trial and Alternative Resolution Generally (a) Application and Objective. Rules 101 through 126 (“these rules”) apply in counties designated for the superior court’s pilot program for a fast trial with an alternative resolution option. These rules use the acronym “FASTAR” to refer to the program. The program’s objective is to achieve a more efficient and inexpensive, yet fair, resolution of eligible cases. One of these rules may be cited as “FASTAR ###.” (b) Eligibility Criteria. The court administrator will assign to the FASTAR program all civil actions that meet each of the four following eligibility criteria: (1) The plaintiff requests monetary damages only, and is not requesting injunctive or other non-monetary relief. (2) The amount of money sought by each plaintiff exceeds the limit set by local rule for compulsory arbitration. (3) The amount of money sought by any party does not exceed $50,000, including punitive damages but excluding interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees. (4) The plaintiff will not need to serve the summons and complaint on any defendant in a foreign country. (c) Civil Rules. The FASTAR rules supplement the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure (the “civil rules”), and the civil rules, excluding Rules 72 through 77, continue to apply to FASTAR cases. However, a FASTAR rule applies if a civil rule is inconsistent with these rules or these rules specifically provide otherwise. (d) Plurals. The use of the words “plaintiff” and “defendant” in these rules includes the respective plurals. Rule 102. Certificates; Forms (a) FASTAR Certificate. At the time of filing any civil complaint requesting money damages not exceeding $50,000 for any claimant, the plaintiff must file a separate FASTAR certificate. The FASTAR certificate must state whether the action meets the four FASTAR eligibility criteria listed in Rule 101(b). The plaintiff must serve the FASTAR certificate on each defendant with the summons and complaint. (b) Controverting Certificate. Any defendant who disagrees with the plaintiff’s FASTAR certificate must file a controverting certificate that specifies the reason for disagreement. The defendant must file the controverting certificate with the answer Page 1 of 24 or with a Rule 12 motion, whichever is filed first. If the defendant files a controverting certificate, the matter must be referred to the assigned judge for a determination of whether the case is eligible for the FASTAR program. (c) Forms. Forms for the “FASTAR Certificate” (Rule 102(a)), a controverting certificate (Rule 102(b)), and the “Choice Certificate” (Rule 103(b)) are available on the superior court website of each county participating in the program. Rule 103. Plaintiff’s Choice (a) Plaintiff’s Choice. For every case in the FASTAR program, the plaintiff alone has the choice of proceeding by Fast Trial or Alternative Resolution. (b) Manner of Choosing. (1) “Choice Certificate.” When filing the complaint, or not later than 20 days after the first filing by any defendant, the plaintiff must file and serve on the defendant a “Choice Certificate.” The Choice Certificate must state whether the plaintiff chooses to proceed by Fast Trial or by Alternative Resolution. (2) “Waiver.” If the plaintiff chooses Alternative Resolution, then plaintiff’s Choice Certificate must include express waiver of the rights: (A) to have a trial before a judge or jury, and (B) to appeal the Alternative Resolution decision, award, or judgment to the superior court or to an appellate court. (c) Failure to Choose. If the plaintiff does not timely file a Choice Certificate, the case will proceed by Fast Trial. (d) Effect of a Counterclaim, Cross-claim, or Third-Party Complaint. (1) If the case includes a counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint, the action will proceed by Fast Trial if the plaintiff timely made that choice in the plaintiff’s Choice Certificate, or if the plaintiff failed to file a timely Choice Certificate. A defendant, counterclaimant, cross-claimant, or third-party plaintiff has no right under these rules to make the choice or to file a Choice Certificate. (2) If the case includes a counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint, the action will proceed by Alternative Resolution if the plaintiff timely made that choice in the plaintiff’s Choice Certificate. In that circumstance, and notwithstanding the waiver under Rule 103(b)(2), the plaintiff retains the right to appeal and to have a trial before a judge or jury regarding the decision or award on the counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party complaint. Page 2 of 21 Rule 104. Modification of Civil Rule 4(i) Regarding Time for Service; Dismissal of an Unserved or Timely-Served Defendant (a) General Limitation. The time limit of Civil Rule 4(i) does not apply to FASTAR cases. Instead, a plaintiff must serve the summons and complaint on every defendant within 60 days after the filing date of the complaint. (b) Dismissal of an Unserved Defendant. If the plaintiff does not complete service within 60 days after filing the complaint, the court will notify the plaintiff that it will dismiss the action without prejudice as to any unserved defendant 15 days after the date of the court’s notice, and without further notice, unless the plaintiff completes service within those 15 days. (c) Extension. Within 60 days after filing the complaint, the plaintiff may request and the court may extend the time for completing service, but the court may not extend the time limit for service more than 90 days after the filing date of the complaint. (d) Dismissal of a Timely-Served Defendant. The court will dismiss without prejudice any timely-served defendant who did not file an answer or other response within 120 days after the filing date of the complaint, unless the plaintiff has filed a Rule 55 application for the entry of default of that defendant before the 120th day. The court will provide the plaintiff at least 20 days’ notice before dismissing that defendant in a multi-defendant case, or before dismissing a case that has only one defendant. Rule 105. Modification of Civil Rules 4.1 and 4.2 Regarding Waiver of Service (a) Generally. The time limits provided in Civil Rules 4.1(c) and 4.2(d) regarding waiver of service do not apply in FASTAR cases. Rules 105(b) and 105(c) modify those time limits. The other provisions of Civil Rules 4.1(c) and 4.2(d) apply to FASTAR cases with these modifications. (b) Returning the Waiver. Regardless of whether a defendant is within or outside of Arizona, a defendant must return a request for waiver of service within 15 days after the plaintiff sent it. (c) Time to Respond. A defendant who is within Arizona must file a response to the complaint within 35 days after the plaintiff sent the waiver of service. A defendant who is outside Arizona must file a response to the complaint within 45 days after the waiver was sent. Page 3 of 21 Rule 106. Assignment of a Judge The court will promptly assign a judge to every FASTAR case. The assigned judge may be a superior court judge or commissioner, or a judge pro tempore.