Arizona Personal Injury Settlements and Law

• $1 Million Verdict (2024 Arizona): The plaintiff alleged that a custom made candle he purchased for his mother, made with fragrance sold by defendant Binder Industries d/b/a Candlewic, was lit by his mother resulting in a flashover with flames two feet high, and in his attempt to put the fire out, his hands were both burned.
  The plaintiff reported burns to both hands with third degree burns to his right hand which required a skin graft procedure using skin removed from his left leg. The plaintiff claimed he was permanently disfigured and suffered a quality of life loss and a diminished earning capacity.
• $15,000 Settlement (2024 Arizona): A minor was a passenger in his mother’s car when it was involved in accident caused by the defendant on the interstate. The minor suffered a knee injury and allegedly suffered PTSD and emotional distress as a result of the accident.
• $25,000 Verdict (2024 Arizona): The plaintiff was stopped for a red light at an intersection when the defendant rear-ended her. The plaintiff allegedly suffered injuries to her neck and back including lumbar sprains and whiplash. Liability was admitted and the case went to trial on damages only.
• $31.5 Million Verdict (2023 Arizona): This is a childbirth malpractice claim. The plaintiff’s birth injury lawsuit alleged the healthcare provider inappropriately administered Pitocin during her labor despite signs that her son was in distress and suffering from oxygen deprivation. The child developed cerebral palsy as a result of loss of oxygen to his brain. The jury found Banner Health 57% liable, with the remaining liability attributed to a physician who reached a confidential settlement prior to the trial. Banner Health did not make any settlement offer.
• $15,000 Verdict (2023 Arizona): The plaintiff was stopped at a red light at an intersection when the defendant allegedly ran into him from behind. The plaintiff suffered unspecified personal injuries (which usually means soft tissue things like sprains).
• $216,000 Verdict (2023 Arizona): The plaintiff was reportedly a patron at a convenience store owned, operated and managed by defendant Circle K Stores Inc. in Phoenix, Ariz., to purchase ice. The plaintiff said when he was walking in or near the store’s freezer, he slipped and fell on ice that was present on the floor.
• $1,250,000 Verdict (2020 Arizona): A man was T-boned by a pickup truck, suffering severe injuries. The jury ruled in favor of the man, awarding him $1,250,000.
• $220,000 Verdict (2020 Arizona): A man was struck in a hotel parking lot, resulting in a torn left rotator cuff. The Maricopa County jury found the at-fault driver 90 percent liable and awarded $220,000.
• $250,000 Verdict (2019 Arizona): A veterinarian providing care for a dog at its owner’s home was mauled, suffering severe bite wounds. The Pima County jury awarded $250,000.
• $5,000,000 Verdict (2019 Arizona): A 22-year-old man was fatally struck by a tractor-trailer. His parents and wife, alleging the truck driver’s negligence, were awarded $5,000,000 by a Maricopa County jury.
• $24,100,000 Verdict (2018 Arizona): A 57-year-old man operating a helicopter suffered a crash due to transmission failure. Resulting in paraplegia and multiple injuries, a Maricopa County jury awarded $24,100,000.
• $7,000,000 Settlement (2017 Arizona): A 40-year-old woman suffered permanent brain damage and quadriparesis due to the VA staff’s alleged negligence in respiratory therapy. The case settled for $7,000,000.
• $500,000 Verdict (2014 Arizona): A dental office manager accused her employer of sexual harassment and wrongful termination. A Maricopa County jury awarded her $500,000.

Arizona Personal Injury Law

Below is a summary of some of the key personal injury laws in Arizona.

2-Year Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations is a law that sets the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated. For most personal injury cases in Arizona, including those involving negligence, the statute of limitations is two years from the date of the injury (Arizona Revised Statutes § 12-542). This is the same statute of limitations for medical malpractice, product liability, and wrongful death claims.

Discovery Rule: If the injury was not discovered (and could not reasonably have been discovered) immediately, the statute of limitations may begin from the date of discovery instead of the date of the incident.

Minors: If the injured party is a minor, the statute of limitations does not begin until they reach the age of 18. However, there are specific rules and exceptions, especially in medical malpractice cases.

Mental Incapacity: If the injured person is mentally incompetent at the time of the injury, the clock on the statute of limitations may not start until the disability is lifted.

Lawsuits Against the State

Special rules and time limits apply if you are filing an injury lawsuit against any Arizona state government entity—be it a city, county, or state—or a government employee must occur within one year following the date of the injury (Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-821).

Moreover, if you possess a claim against the government, a government employee, or a public school, it’s essential to provide written notice of your claim, typically within 180 days from the injury date (Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-821.01). Notably, this written notice requirement stands distinct from initiating a lawsuit. It is a prerequisite before you can proceed with filing a lawsuit. Failure to comply with this notice requirement as mandated by law prohibits you from pursuing your case in court.

Pure Comparative Fault

Arizona follows the principle of pure comparative negligence. In this framework, if an individual is found partially responsible for their injuries, the recoverable damages are reduced proportionally to their share of fault. However, as long as one is not entirely at fault (100%), they can still seek damages. Here’s an illustrative example:

Let’s consider an auto accident scenario. You file a lawsuit against the other driver (the defendant) for damages. The defendant argues that you also bear responsibility and requests damages against you. Following a trial, the jury determines your total damages as $50,000 and assigns you 30% of the fault for the accident. They attribute 70% of the blame to the defendant, calculating the defendant’s damages at $40,000. Here’s the breakdown of damages each party would collect:

As you were found 30% at fault, you can recover 70% of your $50,000 in damages: $50,000 x 70% = $35,000. This amount would be obtained from the defendant’s insurance company.

In contrast, since the defendant was assigned 70% of the fault, they can collect 30% of their $40,000 total damages: $40,000 x 30% = $12,000. Your insurance company will issue a $12,000 payment to the defendant.

Arizona Dog Bite Law

Arizona has a strict liability standard for dog bite injury cases (Arizona Rev. Stat. 11-1025.) This standard holds dog owners responsible for any biting incidents, regardless of whether they had prior knowledge of their dog’s potential to cause harm. This differs from states following a “one-bite rule,” offering more leniency to owners unaware of their dog’s potential danger to others.

Moreover, this same strict liability standard extends to injuries inflicted by dogs deemed “at large.” In legal terms within Arizona, an “at-large” dog refers to one not under leash control or confined within a secure area like a fenced yard. Should an at-large dog cause an injury, liability can be attributed to the owner or the individual responsible for the dog, such as a dog-walker or a friend pet-sitting.

Crucially, the law encompassing at-large dogs covers injuries beyond mere bites. It includes scenarios like a person being knocked over by an exuberant large dog, resulting in injuries like a sprained ankle or a broken wrist. Additionally, it applies to property damage caused by an at-large dog.

Arizona’s strict liability rule does not apply to every circumstance in which a person sustains injuries due to a dog. For instance, these laws do not cover incidents where someone is injured—though not bitten—by a dog that is not “at large.” Consider a scenario where a friendly dog, while leashed, causes an injury like a broken wrist after knocking someone over. In these non-bite dog injury cases, general negligence rules apply.

Arizona Mass Tort Cases

Our firm is handling a number of product liability / mass tort cases that impact Arizona residents including:

• Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit
• AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit
• Depo Provera Lawsuit
• Bard PowerPort Lawsuit

Arizona Medical Malpractice

Arizona has a number of special laws and rules that apply only in medical malpractice cases. A medical malpractice case includes any tort claim for injuries brought against a licensed healthcare provider or hospital. In Arizona, you may bring a medical malpractice lawsuit for an injury you suffered for negligence by any licensed healthcare provider. This includes doctors, nurses, hospitals, etc.

Expert Certification Requirements

Expert testimony is typically required to prove the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. This applies especially when evaluating medical judgments that are beyond the understanding of laypersons. The need for expert testimony is a legal question reviewed de novo.

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur allows certain obvious cases of negligence to proceed without expert testimony. These involve circumstances where the negligence is so apparent that a layperson can understand it, such as a foreign object being left inside a patient after surgery.

If expert testimony is necessary, the plaintiff must then furnish at least one preliminary affidavit endorsed by a qualified medical expert witness. This affidavit must contain the expert’s viewpoint regarding the actions, errors, or oversights of the health care provider that breached the appropriate standard of care. Additionally, it should explain how these actions or inactions resulted in your injuries and subsequent damages. The affidavit must be filed and served on the defendant within 30 days of the defendant filing a response to your lawsuit’s initial document.

If the certification states that expert testimony isn’t required, the defendant may request the judge to mandate submission of an expert affidavit before proceeding with the lawsuit. The judge will then determine the necessity of the affidavit and, if deemed essential, issue the directive.

Product Liability Law in Arizona

Claims relating to defective or dangerous products that cause injury or harm to consumers are governed by Arizona product liability law. The applicable law for product liability claims in Arizona is derived from a combination of both case law and statutory law. This summary provides a very brief overview of Arizona product liability law.

Under Arizona law, a manufacturer or seller of a product can be held liable if that product is defective and that defect causes injuries or harm. Arizona law acknowledges the 3 basic types of product defects as identified in the Restatement of Torts:

1. Manufacturing Defects: a manufacturing defect is something that occurs during the assembly process rending the product defective and potentially dangerous.
2. Design Defects: a design defect occurs when the product is manufactured correctly, but there is something inherent in its design that makes it defective and dangerous (e.g., an ingredient that causes cancer).
3. Failure to Warn: a product can be considered defective if it is sold without proper warnings or instructions that enable users to avoid potential risks.

Arizona Mass Tort Claims

There are a number of national mass torts or “class actions” that involve hundreds of Arizona plaintiffs, including claims our law firm is handling across the country:

• Hair relaxer lawsuit: recent evidence has shown that long term use of chemical hair relaxer products (most commonly used by African American women) can cause uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine fibroids, and other conditions. This has prompted hundreds of women to file hair relaxer lawsuits.
• Tepezza Hearing Loss Lawsuit: Tepezza is a prescription drug used for the treatment of thyroid eye disease. New research has shown that Tepezza injections can cause permanent hearing loss. This has led to a growing wave of lawsuits across the country.
• Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit: Suboxone is a drug used to treat opioid addiction. The new dissolvable film version of Suboxone has been shown to cause severe tooth decay. The manufacturer of Suboxone is now facing thousands of lawsuits for failing to warn about this side effect.

Contact Us About Arizona Injury Cases

If you have a personal injury or medical malpractice case in Arizona, contact our injury lawyers today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online.