Arizona State Court Motion for Reconsideration (Civil)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF [DESCRIBE ORDER — E.G., ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS]

(Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e))

[MOVANT NAME] ("Movant"), the [Plaintiff/Defendant], respectfully moves this Court under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e) to reconsider its [Order/Ruling] entered [__/__/____] (the "Order"). In support, Movant states as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Movant seeks reconsideration of the Order, which [describe what the Court decided]. A party seeking reconsideration of a court order or ruling "may file a motion for reconsideration." Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e)(1).

2. Reconsideration is warranted because [☐ there has been an intervening change in the controlling law / ☐ new evidence has become available that was not previously available with reasonable diligence / ☐ the Court should correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice], as set forth below.

II. THE SPECIFIC ORDER TO BE RECONSIDERED

3. On [__/__/____], the Court entered the Order, which [state precisely what the Court decided — the holding, the relief granted or denied, and as to which claim(s)/party(ies)].

4. The Order is [interlocutory/non-final because [explain — e.g., "claims remain pending"; no Rule 54(b)/(c) certification of finality has been entered]] / [a final judgment — if so, STOP: consider Rule 59 or Rule 60 instead, and note that a Rule 7.1(e) motion will not extend the appeal deadline].

5. Movant files this Motion promptly upon [identify trigger — e.g., entry of the Order / discovery of the new evidence / issuance of the intervening decision].

III. LEGAL STANDARD

6. Authority. "A party seeking reconsideration of a court order or ruling may file a motion for reconsideration." Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e)(1). Under Rule 54(b), an order that "adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties . . . is subject to revision at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties' rights and liabilities."

7. Recognized grounds. A motion for reconsideration is appropriately granted where the movant shows:
   - (a) an intervening change in the controlling law;
   - (b) the availability of new evidence not previously available with reasonable diligence; or
   - (c) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.

A motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to reargue matters already decided or to raise arguments or evidence that could have been presented earlier.

8. Procedure (Rule 7.1(e)(2)). "All such motions, however denominated, must be submitted without oral argument and without the filing of a responsive or reply memorandum, unless the court orders otherwise. No motion for reconsideration may be granted, however, without the court providing all other parties an opportunity to respond."

IV. ARGUMENT

Ground Selected (check all that apply)

☐ A. Intervening change in controlling law
☐ B. New evidence not available with reasonable diligence
☐ C. Clear error or manifest injustice

A. Intervening Change in Controlling Law

9. Since the Court entered the Order, the controlling law has changed. Specifically, [identify the new decision, statute, or rule — e.g., the Arizona Supreme Court's decision in [CASE], ___ P.3d ___ (Ariz. [YEAR]); or the enactment/amendment of A.R.S. § [____]].

10. The Order rested on [state the prior legal premise]. Under the now-controlling authority, [explain how the change requires a different result]. The Court should reconsider and revise the Order accordingly.

B. Newly Available Evidence

11. After entry of the Order, Movant discovered the following evidence that was not available, and could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered, before the Order: [describe and attach as Exhibit [__]].

12. This evidence is material because [explain how it bears on the issue the Order decided and would change the result]. Movant exercised reasonable diligence by [describe efforts].

C. Clear Error / Manifest Injustice

13. The Order reflects clear error in that [identify the specific error — e.g., "the Court applied the standard for [X] when the governing standard is [Y]"; "the Order overlooked [fact/argument] of record at [citation]"].

14. Allowing the Order to stand would work a manifest injustice because [explain the concrete prejudice]. Correcting the error now conserves judicial resources and avoids prejudice to the parties.

V. RELIEF REQUESTED

15. WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that this Court:

a. GRANT this Motion for Reconsideration under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e);

b. VACATE or MODIFY the Order entered [__/__/____] and, upon reconsideration, enter [state the specific relief sought]; and

c. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

VI. NOTE ON TIMING AND APPELLATE DEADLINES

16. No effect on appeal deadline. "A motion for reconsideration is not a substitute for a motion filed under Rule 50(b), 52(b), 59, or 60, and will not extend the time within which a notice of appeal must be filed." Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e)(3). Do NOT rely on this Motion to toll or extend the appeal clock.

17. Reconsideration of interlocutory orders. Because a non-final order "is subject to revision at any time before" final judgment (Rule 54(b)), the Court may reconsider an interlocutory Order at any time before final judgment. There is no fixed page-distinct deadline in Rule 7.1(e) itself; file promptly to avoid prejudice and to allow revision before final judgment. [Check the operative scheduling order and any local/division practice for timing expectations.]

18. If the challenged decision is a FINAL judgment, use the appropriate post-judgment vehicle: a motion for new trial or to alter/amend under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 59 (with its own deadlines) or a motion for relief from judgment under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 60 — see the separate templates. A Rule 7.1(e) motion will not preserve appellate rights.

VII. PROPOSED ORDER

A proposed form of order is lodged contemporaneously herewith.

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

The Court, having considered Movant's Motion for Reconsideration under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e) [and having provided all other parties an opportunity to respond as required by Rule 7.1(e)(2)], and good cause appearing, GRANTS the Motion. The [Order/Ruling] entered [__/__/____] is VACATED/MODIFIED as follows: [state ruling].

DATED this ____ day of __________, 20____.

_________________________________
Judge of the Superior Court

VIII. SIGNATURE

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this ____ day of __________, 20____.

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
State Bar of Arizona No.: [________________]
Attorney for [Movant]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
Telephone: [____________]
Email: [____________]

IX. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I electronically filed the foregoing Motion for Reconsideration with the Clerk of the Superior Court using the [AZTurboCourt / court e-filing] system, which served a copy on all counsel of record, and/or served a copy on the following in accordance with Ariz. R. Civ. P. 5 by [U.S. Mail / email / hand delivery]:

[OPPOSING COUNSEL / PARTY NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[EMAIL]

_________________________________
[NAME]

Sources & References

• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e) — Motions for Reconsideration: (1) a party may file; (2) submitted without oral argument and without responsive/reply memorandum unless the court orders otherwise, and no motion may be GRANTED without giving other parties an opportunity to respond; (3) not a substitute for Rule 50(b), 52(b), 59, or 60, and does not extend the appeal deadline. https://govt.westlaw.com/azrules (Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 7.1)
• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a) — motion requirements; 17-page limit for motion and supporting memorandum.
• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 54(b) — an order resolving fewer than all claims/parties is not final and is "subject to revision at any time" before such a judgment.
• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 5 — service of pleadings and other papers.
• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 59 / 60 — motion for new trial / to alter or amend; relief from judgment (separate post-judgment mechanisms and templates).