Call For A Free Consultation(602) 345-1818Free Case Review
-
Cities Served
-
T-Shirt Lawyer
Fighting Suits,
Not Wearing Them.Enter the universeStories, animation and community. Created by Impact Legal.
Call For A Free Consultation(602) 345-1818Free Case Review
Fighting Suits, Stories, animation and community. Created by Impact Legal.
We're Here To Help 24/7
(602) 345-1818Most people who get hurt in a crash have never been inside a courthouse, and the phrase “we’re filing a lawsuit” sounds a lot more dramatic than the reality. The Arizona car accident lawsuit process is a sequence of written steps with deadlines, and most of it happens in offices rather than courtrooms. This article walks through that sequence in order: the complaint, the summons and service, the defendant’s answer, the scheduling order, disclosure and discovery, depositions and expert witnesses, motions, settlement talks, and trial preparation. It also clears up the single most common misunderstanding we hear, which is that filing a lawsuit means you have given up on settling.
For the broader picture of how claims work before litigation, start with our Phoenix personal injury resources hub. Facts, policy language, and deadlines change the answer to almost every question below, so treat this as education rather than advice about a specific situation.
Most crash claims begin as insurance claims, not lawsuits. You report the crash, the adjuster opens a file, you treat, and at some point a demand goes out. The claim becomes a lawsuit only when someone files a complaint with a court. Our page on the difference between an insurance claim and a lawsuit covers that fork in more detail.
Common reasons a claim moves into litigation:
The Arizona Judicial Branch publishes a general overview of how civil lawsuits and trials proceed in state court (azcourts.gov). What follows tracks that same sequence as it typically plays out in an injury case.
Litigation starts with a complaint. That is the written document that names the parties, describes the crash, states the legal theory (usually negligence), and describes the categories of harm claimed. It does not contain your evidence. It frames the dispute.
When the complaint is filed, the court issues a summons. The summons is the official notice telling the defendant a case has been filed and that a response is required within a set time. The summons and complaint then have to be served on the defendant, meaning delivered under the methods the rules allow. Service matters more than people expect. A case can be perfectly valid and still stall out because the defendant was never properly served, which is a real issue when the at-fault driver has moved or gave a bad address at the scene.
Note who gets sued here: the at-fault driver or other responsible party, not the insurance company. The insurer’s obligation comes from its policy, and it usually hires and pays for the defense lawyer.
The defendant responds with an answer. The answer goes through the complaint and admits, denies, or states a lack of knowledge about each allegation, then lists affirmative defenses. In crash cases, the defense frequently raises comparative fault, meaning it claims you share some responsibility for the collision.
Instead of, or alongside, an answer, the defense may file early motions. A motion to dismiss argues the complaint fails legally on its face. Other early motions address venue, parties, or the sufficiency of specific claims. None of that is a verdict on your injuries. It is procedural positioning.
Once an answer is on file, the court usually issues a scheduling order. That order sets the calendar: deadlines for disclosures, deadlines to identify expert witnesses, a cutoff for discovery, deadlines for dispositive motions, and often a trial setting. From that point forward, the case runs on the court’s clock rather than the adjuster’s.
Disclosure and discovery are where the factual record actually gets built, and they take up most of the calendar in a filed case.
Arizona practice requires the parties to disclose their cases affirmatively rather than waiting to be asked. Disclosure statements typically identify witnesses, describe the factual basis for each claim or defense, itemize damages, list documents, and identify expert opinions. They get supplemented as the case develops.
Discovery is the formal process for getting information from the other side. The main tools:
Discovery cuts both ways. The defense will request your treatment history, and prior conditions become fair game when you claim the crash caused a specific injury. That is exactly why documentation matters early, and why a pre-existing condition needs to be addressed with medical support rather than left to be discovered.
Adjuster conduct sometimes becomes an issue at this stage too, because the claim file and the insurer’s handling of the claim can be relevant. Our page on insurance adjuster tactics in Arizona covers the patterns that show up long before suit is filed. One related point worth stating plainly: you are generally not required to give a recorded statement to the other driver’s insurer. Obligations to your own insurer are different, because most auto policies contain cooperation terms requiring you to assist in the investigation of your own claim. Read the policy language, or have someone read it with you, before assuming either way.
Depositions are sworn question-and-answer sessions taken outside court with a court reporter present. If a case stays in litigation long enough, the plaintiff’s deposition is commonly taken, though many filed cases resolve before that happens. When it does happen, expect questions about the crash, your medical history, your work, your daily limitations, and any statements you made earlier. The defense may also depose treating providers, eyewitnesses, and sometimes family members.
Expert witnesses get disclosed on the schedule the court sets. In crash litigation, experts commonly include treating or retained physicians, accident reconstruction analysts, and, when income loss is significant, economists or vocational analysts.
Experts matter most for future medical costs. You cannot simply assert that you will need surgery in five years. Projected future treatment generally has to be established through qualified medical testimony explaining what care is reasonably probable and what it will likely cost, and that testimony has to satisfy Arizona’s rules on expert opinion. Discovery is where that proof gets built. See our page on future medical expenses in an Arizona accident claim.
Motions continue throughout. Summary judgment motions argue a claim or defense fails as a matter of law on undisputed facts. Motions in limine fight over what the jury will be permitted to hear.
Here is what most people don’t realize: filing a lawsuit does not foreclose settlement. The two tracks run at the same time.
Settlement discussions can happen the week after the complaint is served, after a key deposition, after a summary judgment ruling, at a court-ordered settlement conference, in private mediation, or on the courthouse steps. Cases frequently resolve after litigation begins, because litigation produces the one thing negotiation lacked: evidence the other side cannot ignore. A defense lawyer who just watched your treating surgeon testify has a very different view of the file than an adjuster reading a demand letter.
If an offer arrives mid-litigation, the analysis is the same as it was pre-suit. Our page on whether to accept a settlement offer in Arizona walks through the factors that drive that decision.
If the case does not resolve, trial preparation begins in earnest: pretrial statements, exhibit and witness lists, proposed jury instructions, deposition designations, and motions about admissibility. Witnesses are prepared. Demonstratives get built.
Trial follows a predictable order. Jury selection, opening statements, the plaintiff’s case, the defense case, closing arguments, jury instructions, deliberation, verdict. A civil jury decides liability, allocates fault, and determines damages. Post-trial motions and appeal rights follow the verdict.
Arizona applies comparative fault. In the ordinary negligence case, sharing some blame does not bar recovery; instead the recovery is reduced in proportion to the claimant’s percentage of fault (A.R.S. § 12-2505). The arithmetic is straightforward: total damages multiplied by (100% minus your fault percentage) equals what you recover. Damages of $100,000 with 20% fault assigned to you yields $80,000.
There is an express carve-out in the same statute. A.R.S. § 12-2505 provides that there is no right to comparative negligence in favor of a claimant who has intentionally, wilfully, or wantonly caused or contributed to the injury or wrongful death. So the proportional-reduction rule is the general rule, not a universal one, and conduct at that level can take a claimant outside it entirely.
The jury does the assigning. It allocates a percentage of fault to each party. Under A.R.S. § 12-2506, fault may also be allocated to a person who is not a party, but that is conditional rather than automatic: nonparty fault may be considered only where the plaintiff entered into a settlement agreement with the nonparty or where the defending party gives notice of the nonparty before trial in accordance with the applicable court rule. That notice requirement is the practical limit on the “empty chair” defense, and a late or missing notice is worth checking. Those same provisions make several liability the general rule in Arizona, subject to statutory exceptions, meaning a defendant is ordinarily responsible for its own share rather than automatically for the entire judgment. That differs from joint liability systems, where any one defendant can be pursued for the whole amount. Which rule applies to a particular set of facts should be verified against the current statute. Our page on comparative negligence in Arizona goes deeper.
Everything above assumes the complaint was filed on time. In Arizona, personal injury actions generally must be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues (A.R.S. § 12-542). Miss it and the merits stop mattering.
Three complications come up often:
If a city bus, a school district vehicle, a public employee, a government vehicle, or a public road condition is involved, two separate deadlines apply, and both are shorter than the general two-year rule.
First, a notice of claim must be filed within 180 days after the cause of action accrues, under A.R.S. § 12-821.01. That statute reaches claims against a public entity, a public school, or a public employee, so school buses and school district vehicles fall inside it. The notice has content requirements, including a specific settlement amount and the facts supporting it. A claim not filed within that window is generally barred.
Second, and this is the part people miss, the lawsuit itself must be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues when the defendant is a public entity or public employee, under A.R.S. § 12-821. That one-year period replaces the usual two-year window. Someone who assumes they have two years because it’s a car crash can lose the claim entirely while still technically inside the general limitations period.
Exceptions exist and they are fact-specific. The notice statute includes provisions addressing minors and persons under a legal disability, and accrual for both deadlines turns on when the claimant knew or reasonably should have known of the injury and its cause. Whether a particular defendant even qualifies as a public entity, public school, or public employee is itself a question worth confirming early, because contractors, transit operators, and quasi-public agencies are not always what they appear on the crash report. Our page on the Arizona notice of claim covers the filing requirements in detail.
Deadlines are fact-dependent. Have yours confirmed rather than assumed.
No. Filing means a case has been opened and a deadline protected. Many filed cases resolve by settlement or dismissal before a jury is ever seated. Filing preserves your rights and changes the leverage; it does not commit you to a verdict.
It depends on the court’s calendar, the complexity of the injuries, the number of parties, and how contested liability is. The scheduling order entered after the answer gives the realistic timeline for a specific case, so ask for it once it’s issued.
Not usually at the start. The most common in-person obligations are a deposition, an independent medical examination if one is ordered, a settlement conference or mediation, and trial if the case gets that far.
Disclosure is the information Arizona practice requires you to provide affirmatively, without being asked. Discovery is the information the other side requests through interrogatories, document requests, admissions, subpoenas, and depositions.
Prior treatment becomes relevant when you claim the crash caused a specific injury, and those records are routinely requested in discovery. That’s an argument for addressing your history directly with medical support, not a reason to avoid filing.
The case cannot proceed against a defendant who has not been properly served. Alternative service methods exist under the rules, and uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage may become the practical route to recovery depending on your policy.
Often the opposite. Litigation produces evidence, and evidence changes valuation. Settlement discussions commonly continue, and sometimes intensify, after suit is filed.
If you’re weighing whether a crash claim needs to be filed, the deadline analysis and the fault analysis should happen before an offer gets accepted, not after. That’s especially true when a public entity, public school, or public employee might be involved, because the one-year lawsuit deadline and the 180-day notice requirement arrive long before most people expect them.
Our team handles Arizona car accident cases, and Jared reviews these questions personally. Fee and case-cost terms are set out in a written agreement.
Talk to us before talking to insurance: (602) 345-1818. Free case review.
About the author: Jared J. Pehrson is the lead attorney at Impact Legal Car Accident Attorneys in Phoenix and practices in personal injury law, including Arizona car accident litigation. More about his background is on his attorney profile.
Sources: A.R.S. § 12-542 (Arizona Legislature); A.R.S. § 12-2505 (Arizona Legislature); Arizona Judicial Branch, Civil Law Self-Service Center.
By Jared J. Pehrson | Impact Legal Car Accident Attorneys
A free conversation can help you understand your next step.