Filter by Category

How to File a Motion for Reconsideration in the Arizona Court of Appeals After an Unpublished Memorandum Decision

You generally have 15 days to file a motion for reconsideration in the Arizona Court of Appeals after an unpublished memorandum decision. These motions are governed primarily by ARCAP 22 and must be tightly focused on specific legal or factual errors the panel overlooked or misapprehended. This article explains when reconsideration is appropriate, how to draft and file it, and how it affects appellate deadlines.

What a Motion for Reconsideration Is (and Is Not) in Arizona

A motion for reconsideration in the Arizona Court of Appeals is a request that the same panel re-examine its decision because it “overlooked” or “misapprehended” a material point of law or fact. In Arizona appellate practice, this mechanism is governed primarily by Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure (ARCAP) 22. Although lawyers sometimes refer to it as a “rehearing,” ARCAP uses “reconsideration.”

Reconsideration is not a second round of briefing. It is not a vehicle to add new evidence, present brand-new arguments, or repackage positions the court already rejected. The Court of Appeals expects these motions to be narrow, specific, and anchored to the record and controlling law.

Does an Unpublished Memorandum Decision Change the Analysis?

Not much as to availability. An unpublished memorandum decision is still a decision of the Arizona Court of Appeals, and ARCAP 22 still provides the procedure to seek reconsideration. The practical differences are strategic:

First, memorandum decisions are typically used when the panel believes existing law controls and the case does not warrant a published opinion. That can make reconsideration harder because the court views the matter as straightforward application of settled law.

Second, the issues that tend to move the needle on reconsideration in a memorandum decision are usually discrete: a mistaken record citation, a misstatement of the procedural posture, or a legal standard applied incorrectly to the undisputed facts.

Deadline: When Must You File?

The standard deadline is 15 days

Under ARCAP 22, a motion for reconsideration generally must be filed within 15 days after the appellate decision is filed. Count from the filing date of the memorandum decision, not from the date you receive it. Do not assume mailing adds time; calculate conservatively and verify using the rules and the court’s electronic notices.

If you are considering both reconsideration and a petition for review to the Arizona Supreme Court, build a calendar that accounts for how reconsideration may affect subsequent deadlines. In many cases, a timely reconsideration motion will delay issuance of the mandate and can affect the timing for further review. Because these timing rules are consequential, confirm the current ARCAP provisions before filing.

Extensions are not guaranteed

Requests to extend reconsideration deadlines can be disfavored. If you truly need an extension, you should be prepared to show good cause and file promptly. Practically, most successful appellate teams treat reconsideration as an “immediate-response” filing: outline the error within a day or two, draft fast, and refine for accuracy and tone.

Threshold Question: Is Reconsideration Worth Filing?

Before drafting, answer one question: What specific point did the Court of Appeals overlook or misunderstand? If you cannot identify a concrete issue that fits that framing, reconsideration may be a low-percentage move that consumes time and can undercut credibility for later petitions.

Common grounds that can support reconsideration

Strong reconsideration motions often arise from one of these categories:

Record misapprehension: The decision states a fact that is not supported by the record, or overlooks a key record cite (e.g., a stipulation, a preserved objection, a transcript admission).
Legal standard error: The panel applied the wrong standard of review (e.g., treated an issue as abuse of discretion when it was de novo, or vice versa), or misstated the elements of a claim/defense.
Controlling authority overlooked: Binding Arizona Supreme Court precedent (or a controlling statute/rule) was not addressed and materially changes the analysis.
Internal inconsistency: The decision’s reasoning conflicts with its disposition (e.g., it finds waiver but still resolves the merits in a way that depends on preserved error).

Weak grounds that typically fail

Re-argument: “The panel should have weighed the evidence differently” or “the court should have believed our witness.”
New arguments: The motion introduces a new theory that could have been briefed earlier.
General unfairness: Assertions that the result is “unjust” without pinpointing a legal or factual misapprehension.

How to Draft the Motion: Structure and Content That Fits ARCAP 22

A persuasive motion for reconsideration reads like a precise correction, not an accusation. Use a restrained tone, assume good faith, and make it easy for the panel to fix the problem quickly.

1) Caption, identification of the decision, and the relief requested

Identify the memorandum decision by date and case number. In the first paragraph, state exactly what you want:

Reconsideration and amendment of a specific holding;
Reconsideration and issuance of a revised memorandum decision; or
Reconsideration leading to reversal/vacatur of a portion of the disposition.

2) A short “Issue Presented for Reconsideration”

Even if not required, a one-sentence issue statement helps. Example:

“The panel misapprehended the preservation record by stating Appellant did not object at trial, despite a timely Rule 103 objection at RT 5/12/24 at 47:12–48:3.”

3) The pinpoint error (law or fact) with record/legal citations

Quote the exact sentence(s) from the memorandum decision that contain the error. Then provide the correct record cite or authority. Use pinpoint citations and keep your factual presentation lean.

4) Why the error is material to the outcome

This is where many motions fail: they show a mistake but do not show prejudice. Connect the error to a dispositive step in the panel’s reasoning. If correcting the issue would not change the outcome, say so candidly and explain what narrower relief is appropriate (e.g., clarification, modification of a factual statement, or narrowing dicta that could affect future proceedings).

5) A proposed fix the court can adopt

Offer a simple correction the court can implement without re-briefing. For example:

Replace a paragraph with corrected record facts;
Clarify the standard of review and re-run the analysis under that standard;
Correct the waiver/forfeiture discussion based on preservation.

Example: Targeted Reconsideration After a Memorandum Decision

Scenario: The Court of Appeals issues an unpublished memorandum decision affirming summary judgment. The decision states: “Appellant did not argue below that the contract was ambiguous,” and it treats the ambiguity argument as waived.

Record reality: In the superior court, Appellant’s response brief argued ambiguity on pages 7–10 and cited competing extrinsic evidence.

Reconsideration approach: The motion should (1) quote the waiver sentence, (2) cite the superior court filing and page/paragraph, (3) explain that the waiver finding was the basis for affirmance, and (4) request amendment to address ambiguity on the merits under the correct standard. If the ambiguity argument is dispositive, the motion should explain why summary judgment cannot stand once waiver is removed.

This type of pinpoint correction aligns with the core purpose of reconsideration: correcting a misapprehension that drove the outcome.

Filing Mechanics: Where and How to File in the Arizona Court of Appeals

Most filings in the Arizona Court of Appeals are handled through the court’s electronic filing system. Confirm the correct division (Division One in Phoenix or Division Two in Tucson) and comply with formatting, certificate of service, and signature requirements.

Practice tips:

Check page/word limits: ARCAP imposes constraints and formatting rules. Ensure compliance to avoid rejection or an order to refile.
Serve all parties: Include a proper certificate of service and confirm service method under the applicable rules.
Consider a companion motion only if needed: If you need to address timing (e.g., request to stay mandate pending reconsideration), do so explicitly and with authority.

What Happens After You File?

Possible outcomes

The Court of Appeals may:

Deny reconsideration without comment (common);
Grant reconsideration and issue an amended memorandum decision;
Grant in part to correct a factual statement or clarify reasoning while leaving the disposition intact; or
Request a response from the opposing party (less common, but it happens when the court sees potential merit).

Mandate and finality considerations

Reconsideration practice is closely tied to finality. A timely reconsideration motion typically pauses the path toward mandate and may affect the timeline for seeking further review. Do not rely on assumptions—track the docket, read the clerk’s notices carefully, and verify how your filing affects the mandate and any petition-for-review deadlines under current ARCAP provisions.