PERSONAL INJURY DEMAND LETTER — STATE OF ARIZONA

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY — PURSUANT TO ARIZ. R. EVID. 408

ATTORNEY / FIRM INFORMATION

CLAIM INFORMATION

RE: Personal Injury Claim of [________________________________] v. [________________________________]
Claim No.: [________________________________]
Date of Loss: [__/__/____]

Dear [________________________________]:

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

This firm represents [________________________________] ("Claimant") in connection with personal injuries sustained on [__/__/____] as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of your insured, [________________________________] ("Insured" or "Tortfeasor"). This letter constitutes a formal demand for settlement of all claims arising from the above-referenced incident.

This demand is made pursuant to Arizona Rule of Evidence 408 and is intended solely for settlement negotiation purposes. Nothing herein shall constitute an admission or waiver of any rights or claims. Claimant expressly reserves all rights to pursue litigation, including but not limited to claims for compensatory damages, punitive damages, prejudgment interest under A.R.S. § 44-1201, costs, and any other relief available under Arizona law.

We have conducted a thorough investigation into this matter and have concluded that your insured bears [____]% liability for the incident described herein. Under Arizona's pure comparative fault system (A.R.S. § 12-2505), our client is entitled to recover damages reduced only by any percentage of fault attributable to the Claimant, if any. Importantly, Arizona places no caps on compensatory damages — this protection is enshrined in the Arizona Constitution, Article 2, Section 31.

Please direct all communications regarding this claim to this office. Do not contact our client directly.

2. ARIZONA STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

The following Arizona statutes and constitutional provisions govern this personal injury claim:

2.1 Negligence and Comparative Fault

• A.R.S. § 12-2505 — Pure Comparative Fault: Arizona applies a pure comparative fault standard. The defense of contributory negligence or of assumption of risk shall, in all cases whatsoever, be a question of fact and shall, at all times, be left to the jury. If the jury applies either defense, the claimant's action is not barred, but the full damages shall be reduced in proportion to the relative degree of the claimant's fault which is a proximate cause of the injury or death, if any.

2.2 Statute of Limitations

• A.R.S. § 12-542 — The statute of limitations for personal injury actions in Arizona is two (2) years from the date the cause of action accrues. The date of loss in this matter is [__/__/____], making the filing deadline [__/__/____]. We reserve all rights to file suit prior to this date should settlement not be reached.

2.3 No Damage Caps

• Arizona Constitution, Art. 2, § 31 — The right of juries to assess damages shall remain inviolate. The Arizona Constitution prohibits the legislature from imposing caps on damages in personal injury actions. There is no cap on economic damages, non-economic damages, or punitive damages in Arizona.

2.4 Prejudgment Interest

• A.R.S. § 44-1201 — Prejudgment interest is available at the statutory rate of 10% per annum. For unliquidated tort damages, the court has discretion regarding the award of prejudgment interest. The statute provides for interest on judgments including "unliquidated damages, future damages, punitive damages or exemplary damages."

2.5 Joint and Several Liability — Abolished

• A.R.S. § 12-2506 — Arizona has abolished joint and several liability in personal injury actions. Each defendant is liable only for the amount of damages allocated to that defendant in direct proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault, and a separate judgment shall be entered against each defendant for that amount. The exception is for defendants acting in concert. Importantly, the trier of fact may allocate fault to non-parties as well.

2.6 Wrongful Death

• A.R.S. § 12-611 — When death of a person is caused by wrongful act, neglect, or default, and the act, neglect, or default is such as would, if death had not ensued, have entitled the party injured to maintain an action to recover damages, the person who would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable to an action for damages.
• A.R.S. § 12-612 — Action brought by surviving spouse, child, parent, or personal representative.

3. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3.1 The Incident

On [__/__/____], at approximately [____] [a.m./p.m.], the Claimant was [________________________________] at or near [________________________________] (the "Incident Location") in [________________________________], Arizona.

At that time and place, your insured, [________________________________], negligently [________________________________].

As a direct and proximate result of your insured's negligence, the Claimant sustained serious and significant personal injuries as described in detail below.

3.2 Scene and Conditions

3.3 Law Enforcement Response

3.4 Witness Information

3.5 Narrative Summary

[________________________________]

[________________________________]

[________________________________]

4. LIABILITY ANALYSIS

4.1 Duty of Care

Your insured owed the Claimant a duty of reasonable care as established under Arizona common law. Specifically, your insured had a duty to [________________________________].

4.2 Breach of Duty

Your insured breached this duty of care by:

☐ Operating a motor vehicle in a negligent manner
☐ Failing to maintain a proper lookout
☐ Failing to yield the right-of-way (A.R.S. § 28-772 et seq.)
☐ Following too closely in violation of A.R.S. § 28-730
☐ Exceeding the posted speed limit in violation of A.R.S. § 28-701
☐ Operating while under the influence of alcohol or drugs (A.R.S. § 28-1381)
☐ Distracted driving (cell phone, texting, other)
☐ Running a red light or stop sign (A.R.S. § 28-645)
☐ Failure to obey traffic control devices
☐ Unsafe lane change (A.R.S. § 28-729)
☐ Failing to maintain premises in a safe condition
☐ [________________________________]
☐ [________________________________]

4.3 Causation

The Claimant's injuries were the direct and proximate result of your insured's breach of duty. But for your insured's negligent conduct, the Claimant would not have sustained the injuries described herein. The injuries sustained were a foreseeable consequence of the insured's negligent acts.

4.4 Comparative Fault Analysis (A.R.S. § 12-2505)

Under Arizona's pure comparative fault system, a claimant's recovery is diminished by their percentage of fault but is never completely barred — even if the claimant bears majority fault.

Our position is that your insured bears [____]% fault for this incident.

IMPORTANT — SEVERAL LIABILITY (A.R.S. § 12-2506): Arizona has abolished joint and several liability. Your insured is liable only for their proportionate share of fault. However, because your insured bears [____]% fault, the insured remains liable for a substantial share of the total damages. Additionally, the trier of fact may consider non-party fault under A.R.S. § 12-2506(B), but the burden to prove non-party fault falls upon the defendant.

5. INJURIES AND MEDICAL TREATMENT

5.1 Summary of Injuries

As a direct and proximate result of the incident, the Claimant sustained the following injuries:

Primary Diagnoses:
☐ Traumatic brain injury (TBI) / Concussion
☐ Cervical spine injury (herniation, bulge, fracture)
☐ Thoracic spine injury
☐ Lumbar spine injury (herniation, bulge, fracture)
☐ Shoulder injury (rotator cuff tear, labral tear, dislocation)
☐ Knee injury (ACL, MCL, meniscus tear)
☐ Hip injury / fracture
☐ Rib fractures
☐ Wrist / hand fractures
☐ Ankle / foot fractures
☐ Facial lacerations / scarring
☐ Internal organ damage
☐ Soft tissue injuries (sprains, strains, contusions)
☐ Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
☐ Depression / anxiety
☐ [________________________________]
☐ [________________________________]

ICD-10 Codes:
| Code | Description |
|---|---|
| [________] | [________________________________] |
| [________] | [________________________________] |
| [________] | [________________________________] |
| [________] | [________________________________] |

5.2 Chronological Treatment History

Emergency / Acute Care

Primary Care / Follow-Up

Specialist Care

Physical Therapy / Rehabilitation

Surgical Procedures

Diagnostic Imaging

Mental Health Treatment

Prescription Medications

5.3 Current Condition and Prognosis

[________________________________]

[________________________________]

Treating physician's prognosis:
☐ Full recovery expected
☐ Permanent partial impairment — rated at [____]% whole person impairment
☐ Permanent total impairment
☐ Ongoing treatment required (estimated duration: [________________________________])
☐ Future surgery likely or recommended
☐ Maximum medical improvement (MMI) reached on [__/__/____]
☐ MMI not yet reached

5.4 Impact on Daily Living

[________________________________]

[________________________________]

6. DAMAGES CALCULATION

6.1 Summary of Economic Damages

A. Past Medical Expenses

ARIZONA COLLATERAL SOURCE NOTE: Arizona follows the traditional collateral source rule. The full value of medical services rendered is recoverable regardless of amounts paid by insurance or other collateral sources.

B. Future Medical Expenses

C. Past Lost Wages / Income

D. Future Lost Earning Capacity

E. Property Damage

F. Out-of-Pocket Expenses

6.2 Total Economic Damages

6.3 Non-Economic Damages

The Claimant seeks compensation for the following categories of non-economic loss:

☐ Physical pain and suffering (past and ongoing)
☐ Mental and emotional distress
☐ Loss of enjoyment of life
☐ Loss of consortium (spouse: [________________________________])
☐ Disfigurement and scarring
☐ Inconvenience
☐ Humiliation and embarrassment
☐ [________________________________]

Non-Economic Damages Claimed: $[________]

ARIZONA CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION: The Arizona Constitution, Art. 2, § 31 provides: "No law shall be enacted in this state limiting the amount of damages to be recovered for causing the death or injury of any person." Accordingly, there is NO CAP on non-economic damages in Arizona personal injury cases. The Claimant is entitled to the full value of pain and suffering, emotional distress, and all other non-economic losses without statutory limitation.

6.4 Total Compensatory Damages

7. INSURANCE COVERAGE ANALYSIS

7.1 Tortfeasor's Liability Coverage

7.2 Claimant's Coverage

ARIZONA INSURANCE NOTE: Arizona requires minimum auto liability coverage of $25,000/$50,000/$15,000 (A.R.S. § 28-4009). Arizona is a traditional tort state — there is no PIP requirement. UM/UIM coverage is not required in Arizona but is commonly carried. Arizona law does not mandate stacking of UM/UIM coverage.

7.3 Coverage Adequacy Assessment

☐ Claimant's damages are within tortfeasor's policy limits — full policy demand appropriate
☐ Claimant's damages exceed tortfeasor's policy limits — potential excess exposure to insured
☐ UM/UIM claim may be necessary to fully compensate Claimant
☐ Umbrella/excess policy may be implicated

8. PREJUDGMENT INTEREST (A.R.S. § 44-1201)

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1201, the Claimant may be entitled to prejudgment interest on compensatory damages. Arizona's statutory interest rate is 10% per annum.

For unliquidated tort damages, the award of prejudgment interest is within the court's discretion. However, Arizona courts have recognized the compensatory purpose of prejudgment interest in personal injury cases.

Date of loss / interest accrual: [__/__/____]

Estimated prejudgment interest through date of demand: $[________]

NOTE: Failure to evaluate this claim in good faith and tender a reasonable settlement will result in potential exposure to prejudgment interest at 10% per annum — one of the highest statutory rates in the nation.

9. PUNITIVE DAMAGES ANALYSIS

☐ Punitive damages are applicable to this claim.

Arizona imposes no statutory cap on punitive damages, consistent with Arizona Constitution Art. 2, § 31. However, the Arizona Supreme Court requires proof of an "evil mind" by clear and convincing evidence.

The conduct of your insured warrants an award of punitive damages because:

☐ The insured intended to cause harm
☐ The insured was motivated by spite or ill will
☐ The insured's conduct was outrageous, creating a substantial risk of tremendous harm to others
☐ The insured acted with conscious disregard of a known substantial risk of serious harm
☐ [________________________________]

ARIZONA "EVIL MIND" STANDARD: To recover punitive damages in Arizona, the plaintiff must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's conduct showed an "evil mind" — i.e., the defendant either: (1) intended to cause harm, (2) was motivated by spite, or (3) engaged in outrageous conduct creating a substantial risk of tremendous harm to others. See Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz. 149 (1986); Volz v. Coleman Co., 155 Ariz. 567 (1987). Mere negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness alone is insufficient.

Punitive damages claimed: $[________]

☐ Punitive damages are NOT sought at this time. Claimant reserves the right to seek punitive damages in litigation.

10. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

10.1 Demand Amount

Based on the foregoing analysis of liability, damages, and applicable Arizona law, the Claimant hereby demands the total sum of:

$[________]

to fully and finally resolve all claims arising from the incident of [__/__/____].

This demand is allocated as follows:

10.2 Response Deadline

This demand shall remain open for thirty (30) calendar days from the date of this letter, expiring on [__/__/____].

10.3 Consequences of Non-Response

Failure to respond with a reasonable settlement offer within the stated timeframe will result in the following:

1. Filing of a civil complaint in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, County of [________________________________]
2. Pursuit of all available damages, including compensatory, punitive, prejudgment interest, costs, and attorney's fees where applicable
3. Potential for uncapped punitive damages — Arizona's constitutional prohibition on damage caps means there is no ceiling on punitive damage awards
4. Potential bad faith claim against the insurer for failure to reasonably evaluate and settle within policy limits, exposing the insured to personal liability for excess judgment

11. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

The Claimant expressly reserves the following rights:

☐ To amend or supplement this demand based on additional information
☐ To file suit at any time prior to expiration of the statute of limitations
☐ To seek punitive damages based on the "evil mind" standard
☐ To seek prejudgment interest under A.R.S. § 44-1201
☐ To pursue claims against additional parties
☐ To designate non-parties at fault under A.R.S. § 12-2506
☐ To seek costs and attorney's fees as permitted by law
☐ To file a UM/UIM claim against Claimant's own insurer
☐ All other rights and remedies available under Arizona law

Nothing in this demand shall constitute an admission or waiver of any rights, claims, or defenses. This demand does not represent the maximum amount recoverable at trial.

12. ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS AND EXHIBITS INDEX

Medical Records and Bills

☐ Emergency room records and bills — [________________________________]
☐ Hospital admission/discharge records — [________________________________]
☐ Primary care physician records — [________________________________]
☐ Specialist consultation records — [________________________________]
☐ Physical therapy / rehabilitation records — [________________________________]
☐ Surgical records and operative reports — [________________________________]
☐ Diagnostic imaging reports (X-ray, MRI, CT) — [________________________________]
☐ Mental health treatment records — [________________________________]
☐ Pharmacy / prescription records — [________________________________]
☐ Life care plan — [________________________________]
☐ Independent medical examination (IME) report — [________________________________]

Liability Documentation

☐ Police / incident report — Report No. [________________________________]
☐ Photographs of accident scene
☐ Photographs of vehicle / property damage
☐ Photographs of injuries
☐ Witness statements
☐ Surveillance / dashcam footage
☐ Expert accident reconstruction report

Financial Documentation

☐ Employer verification of lost wages
☐ Tax returns (prior [____] years)
☐ Vocational assessment / economic loss report
☐ Property damage estimate / repair invoice
☐ Rental car / transportation receipts
☐ Out-of-pocket expense receipts

Insurance Documentation

☐ Declaration page — Tortfeasor's policy
☐ Declaration page — Claimant's policy
☐ Proof of UM/UIM coverage (if applicable)

13. SIGNATURE AND CERTIFICATION

I certify that the information contained in this demand letter is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to represent the Claimant in this matter and to make this demand on the Claimant's behalf.

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________________
[Attorney Name]
[Firm Name]
State Bar of Arizona No. [________________________________]
[Street Address]
[City], Arizona [ZIP]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

Date: [__/__/____]

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

Arizona Statutes and Constitutional Provisions

• Arizona Constitution, Art. 2, § 31 — No Legislative Caps on Damages
• A.R.S. § 12-542 — Statute of Limitations (2 years — personal injury, wrongful death, property damage)
• A.R.S. § 12-2505 — Comparative Negligence (Pure Comparative Fault)
• A.R.S. § 12-2506 — Joint and Several Liability Abolished; Apportionment of Fault
• A.R.S. § 12-611 — Wrongful Death — Liability
• A.R.S. § 12-612 — Wrongful Death — Parties Plaintiff; Recovery; Distribution
• A.R.S. § 28-701 — Speed Limits
• A.R.S. § 28-730 — Following Too Closely
• A.R.S. § 28-4009 — Motor Vehicle Liability Policy Requirements (25/50/15)
• A.R.S. § 44-1201 — Interest on Judgments / Prejudgment Interest

Key Arizona Case Law

• Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz. 149 (1986) — "Evil mind" standard for punitive damages
• Volz v. Coleman Co., 155 Ariz. 567 (1987) — Punitive damages analysis
• Hutcherson v. City of Phoenix, 192 Ariz. 51 (1998) — Comparative fault principles
• Crackel v. Allstate Ins. Co., 208 Ariz. 252 (App. 2004) — Insurance bad faith

Regulatory Resources

• Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions — https://difi.az.gov/
• Arizona Judicial Branch — https://www.azcourts.gov/

This template is designed for use by licensed Arizona attorneys. It must be customized for each individual case. All statutory citations should be verified against current law before use. This document does not constitute legal advice.