Damages Allocation rule lens: Arizona

The rule in plain language

In Arizona, a general 2-year statute of limitations (SOL) applies to many criminal matters under A.R.S. § 13-107(A). In SOL terms, that typically means the state must initiate the relevant charging action within 2 years of the event that triggers the limitations clock (the “trigger” date in a model).

For this Damages Allocation rule lens: Arizona, the key point is simple and default-only:

• Default SOL in Arizona (general rule): 2 years
• Citation: **A.R.S. § 13-107(A)
• No claim-type-specific sub-rule found for this lens: The content below therefore uses the general/default 2-year period rather than trying to apply a special SOL for a specific claim type.

What “damages allocation” means in this context

Although SOL is often discussed as a “can the case be filed” rule, in a damages allocation workflow it commonly acts like a time gate for what portions of damages are treated as legally cognizable under the default approach. Practically, this means:

• Amounts tied to conduct that falls outside the 2-year limitations window may be treated as non-actionable under the default allocation pathway.
• Amounts tied to conduct within the window stay in the modeled exposure set.
• A DocketMath-style allocation often distributes totals so the portion corresponding to the most likely SOL-valid time band is emphasized.

So, for the purpose of this DocketMath “damages allocation” workflow, the 2-year SOL functions as the allocation boundary.

Why it matters for calculations

In a damages allocation model, the SOL period directly changes the math—specifically, which parts of a multi-year timeline are included.

Small differences in the rule text can change the output materially. Using the correct jurisdiction and effective date ensures the calculation aligns with the authority that applies to your matter.

1) It sets the eligible “lookback” window

If your modeled harm spans more than two years, the SOL boundary can shrink what counts toward the default allocation.

Example framing (illustrative):

• Timeline of claimed damages: March 1, 2021 → March 1, 2024 (3 years)
• Default Arizona SOL: 2 years
• Result: the model may include only the portion that falls within the 2-year interval measured from your defined clock-start (trigger) date, potentially excluding older amounts.

2) It affects prorating (how much each period contributes)

Most damages allocation calculations rely on some variation of:

• Pro rata by time (daily/monthly weighting),
• Event-based allocation (mapping discrete incidents to dates),
• Payment/receipt allocation (linking amounts to cash-flow timing).

In each case, the SOL period decides which date slices are inside vs. outside the included band.

Simple impact pattern:

• If your timeline is 1 year and the SOL is 2 years, you often include the full dataset (depending on exact boundaries).
• If your timeline is 2 years, you typically include most/all amounts within the precise window.
• If your timeline is 3+ years, you often exclude the portions that fall older than the 2-year band.

3) It helps prevent common modeling mistakes

A frequent error is applying the wrong SOL window—either:

• using a longer period than A.R.S. § 13-107(A) allows for the default lens, or
• using a shorter “claim-type-specific” period without confirming it applies.

This Arizona lens avoids that by sticking to what the brief requires:

• use the general/default SOL period, because no claim-type-specific sub-rule was found for this lens.

4) It’s jurisdiction-aware (but not overfitted)

DocketMath’s jurisdiction-aware approach should:

• apply US-AZ assumptions,
• use the 2-year default from the general SOL framework, and
• avoid special sub-rules unless you explicitly add them.

Because the instruction is clear—no claim-type-specific sub-rule found—the calculator should treat 2 years as the baseline.

Use the calculator

Use DocketMath to run a jurisdiction-aware damages allocation using the default Arizona SOL boundary.

Run the Damages Allocation calculation in DocketMath, then save the output so it can be audited later: Open the calculator.

Capture the source for each input so another team member can verify the same result quickly.

Primary CTA

Start here: **/tools/damages-allocation

Inputs to provide (and what they change)

Damages allocation workflows typically require these concepts (even if the button/field labels differ):

• Jurisdiction: set to US-AZ
• Clock start date (“trigger”): the date you assume starts the limitations clock
• Clock end / evaluation date: the date through which you want to allocate damages (often a filing date or modeling cutoff)
• Damages timeline data: amounts and their associated dates (or a summarized distribution by date/range)
• Allocation method: for example, pro rata by time or event-based mapping

How output changes as you adjust inputs:

• Trigger date forward → the 2-year included window shifts forward → more (or different) timeline segments may fall inside.
• Evaluation/cutoff date forward → more later-date amounts can be included, but only if they still fall within the same 2-year band relative to the trigger.
• Timeline span increases → with a fixed 2-year SOL, older parts of the span are more likely to be excluded.

The default Arizona assumption used in this lens

For US-AZ in this lens, DocketMath should apply:

• A.R.S. § 13-107(A): 2-year default SOL
• General/default period only (because no claim-type-specific sub-rule was found here)

Warning (modeling only): If tolling or other timing doctrines apply in the real case, the effective window can differ from 2 years. This lens uses A.R.S. § 13-107(A) as the base default period and does not automatically assume tolling.

Quick checklist before you run

Sources and references

Start with the primary authority for Arizona and confirm the effective date before relying on any output. If the rule has been amended, update the inputs and rerun the calculation.

• Primary authority reference

Related reading

• Damages Allocation Guide for Alabama — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for Alaska — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for American Samoa — Comparative Fault Rules