Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Holds That the Superior Court Has Jurisdiction in Accordance with Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) to Determine Whether Clerical Error Exists in the Record and to Correct Any Error Before Determining If the Court Has Jurisdiction to Address Merits of Matter.

This case concerns the appeal of an administrative decision of the Arizona Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division (“ADOT”).  In December 2011, ADOT administratively extinguished M-11’s title to a mobile home trailer and awarded title to Daniel Gommard.  ADOT’s final decision and order was dated June 19, 2012 and mailed on June 20, 2012.  M-11 appealed ADOT’s administrative decision to the superior court.  M-11’s complaint was dated July 18, 2012, and M-11 certified that it was mailed that same day to the clerk of the Maricopa County Superior Court.  According to the court record, however, the complaint was filed by the clerk’s office on August 7, 2012, which was untimely under the statutory 40-day period to appeal the administrative decision.  See A.R.S. § 12-904(a). 

ADOT filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the superior court lacked jurisdiction because M-11 failed to timely file its complaint.  M-11 argued that its complaint was timely filed and sought relief under the mail delivery rule and Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a).  Based on the superior court record, however, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the complaint.  M-11 filed an appeal.

The Court of Appeals vacated and remanded the case.  The Court of Appeals declined to determine if the mail delivery rule applies to an initial filing in superior court, noting that even if it was generally applicable the rule had no application in this particular case.  But the Court of Appeals found that in accordance with Rule 60(a), the superior court has jurisdiction to determine whether clerical mistakes exist in the record and to correct that error.  Rule 60(a) provides that “clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time of its initiative or on motion of any party and after such notice, if any, as the court orders.”  The superior court erred in concluding that it did not have jurisdiction to determine whether a clerical error existed in the record.  The Court of Appeals remanded for the superior court to determine whether M-11’s complaint was received by the superior court clerk’s office on or before the filing deadline of July 30, 2012, and, if so, to address the merits of the appeal. 

Judge Gemmill authored the opinion, in which Judges Swann and Orozco joined.