Spreadsheet checks before running Structured Settlement in Arizona

What the checker catches

Running a Structured Settlement in Arizona isn’t just a payout-planning exercise—it also depends on whether the underlying claim is still legally actionable. DocketMath (using the structured-settlement calculator) plus a jurisdiction-aware spreadsheet check for US-AZ helps you catch common timing problems before you rely on the numbers.

This checker focuses on one foundational eligibility item used in many settlement workflows: the statute of limitations (SOL) for bringing a claim. For Arizona, the checker applies the general/default 2-year period:

• General SOL Period: 2 years
• General Statute: **A.R.S. § 13-107(A)
• Source: https://www.findlaw.com/state/arizona-law/arizona-criminal-statute-of-limitations-laws.html?utm_source=openai

Clear note: The brief requested claim-type-specific sub-rules. No claim-type-specific sub-rule was found, so the tool does not apply additional shortening/extension logic based on claim category. It uses the general/default 2-year SOL from A.R.S. § 13-107(A).

A practical spreadsheet check should surface issues like these

1. Wrong “start date”

   • Your sheet might use “incident date,” but your workflow actually needs “date of accrual” (or another event date).
   • Output effect: the claim can flip between “timely” and “untimely” purely based on which date you choose as the start.

2. Wrong “as-of” date

   • Teams sometimes mix “today,” “demand date,” and “filing date” across different rows/people.
   • Output effect: a small date inconsistency can move the elapsed time from ≤ 2 years to > 2 years.

3. Missing required date fields

   • If the spreadsheet leaves the start date or as-of date blank, logic can go wrong in two ways:

     • default silently (dangerous), or
     • exclude rows inconsistently.
   • Output effect: you can end up with mismatched outputs—some rows produce full schedules, while others don’t, without an obvious explanation.

4. Date formatting errors

   • Excel/Google Sheets may store dates as text (e.g., 01/15/2025 entered as a string).
   • Output effect: elapsed-time calculations (like as_of_date - start_date) can miscompute, cascading into SOL gate results and downstream eligibility.

5. Jurisdiction mismatch

   • If your spreadsheet includes multiple states, Arizona rules (including A.R.S. § 13-107(A)) should only apply to rows marked US-AZ.
   • Output effect: applying the wrong SOL window can overstate or understate timing risk.

What to add to your spreadsheet (simple “SOL gate” approach)

Create a small column that computes elapsed time and produces a status based on the 2-year general rule.

Example worksheet concept (not legal advice):

• Compute: elapsed_days = as_of_date - start_date
• Gate: elapsed_days <= 730 (and ideally handle leap years using date math)

Suggested outcomes:

• ✅ Pass (within the general 2-year window)
• ❌ Fail (outside the general 2-year window)
• ⚠️ Review (missing/invalid dates, so the checker can’t evaluate reliably)

When to run it

Run the spreadsheet checks before you generate or commit to a structured settlement schedule. Concretely, run it:

• Before the first time you run DocketMath → structured-settlement output you plan to share
• Before you export proposals into PDFs or email drafts
• Before you lock in any payment timing assumptions that assume the claim is still actionable

A repeatable batch workflow (when processing multiple matters)

1. Validate required fields (jurisdiction, claim start date, as-of date)
2. Apply the US-AZ general SOL window using A.R.S. § 13-107(A) → 2 years
3. Flag rows that fail or can’t be evaluated due to missing/invalid inputs
4. Only then run the structured-settlement calculator using the cleaned/flagged rows

Common pitfall to avoid

If you calculate structured settlement outputs first and only later notice date-formatting problems, you may produce multiple “almost right” versions—creating rework and confusing internal review trails. Checking early prevents that.

Try the checker

Use DocketMath’s structured workflow here:

• Primary CTA: **/tools/structured-settlement

To get the most reliable spreadsheet behavior for US-AZ, structure your inputs so the checker can compute the SOL gate using the general/default 2-year rule from A.R.S. § 13-107(A).

Spreadsheet inputs to verify (US-AZ)

• Jurisdiction: US-AZ
• Start date column: real date type (not text)
• As-of date column: real date type (not text)
• SOL rule used: general/default 2-year window under **A.R.S. § 13-107(A)

Gentle reminder: This is a tooling and spreadsheet-quality check. It’s not legal advice, and dates/events used as “start” and “as-of” must match your own case workflow and documentation.

Output behaviors you should expect

• If elapsed time is ≤ 2 years, the row should pass the general SOL gate
• If elapsed time is > 2 years, the row should fail the general SOL gate
• If dates are blank/invalid, the row should be marked for review (rather than producing a misleading result)

Quick QA shortcut

For a fast QA pass, filter your sheet to only:

• missing start date
• missing as-of date
• non-date formatted fields (text)
• non-US-AZ jurisdiction

That short list typically catches the majority of spreadsheet-driven eligibility errors.

Related reading

• Structured Settlement Calculator Guide for Alabama
• Structured Settlement Calculator Guide for Colorado
• Structured Settlement Calculator Guide for Connecticut