|
REFERENCE TITLE: attorney fees; warranty; workmanship; habitability |
|
State of Arizona Senate Fifty-third Legislature Second Regular Session 2018
|
|
SB 1469 |
|
|
|
Introduced by Senators Borrelli: Contreras; Representative Payne
|
AN ACT
amending sections 12‑341.01 and 38‑1107, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to attorney fees.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 12-341.01, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
12-341.01. Recovery of attorney fees
A. In any contested action arising out of a contract, express or implied, the court may award the successful party reasonable attorney fees. If a written settlement offer is rejected and the judgment finally obtained is equal to or more favorable to the offeror than an offer made in writing to settle any contested action arising out of a contract, the offeror is deemed to be the successful party from the date of the offer and the court may award the successful party reasonable attorney fees.
B. Except for an action based on an implied warranty of workmanship and habitability arising out of the construction of improvements on real property, this section shall not be construed as altering, prohibiting or restricting present or future contracts or statutes that may provide for attorney fees.
B. C. The award of reasonable attorney fees pursuant to this section should be made to mitigate the burden of the expense of litigation to establish a just claim or a just defense. It need not equal or relate to the attorney fees actually paid or contracted, but the award may not exceed the amount paid or agreed to be paid.
C. D. The court and not a jury shall award reasonable attorney fees under this section.
Sec. 2. Section 38-1107, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
38-1107. Superior court review hearing; remedy; exceptions
A. If a law enforcement officer is demoted or terminated as the result of an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer reversing the decision or recommendation of a hearing officer, administrative law judge or appeals board where the finding states that there was no just cause for the demotion or termination, the law enforcement officer may bring an action in superior court for a hearing de novo on the demotion or termination.
B. If a law enforcement officer is demoted or terminated by an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer where there is no hearing officer, administrative law judge or appeals board to review the demotion or termination, the law enforcement officer may bring an action in superior court to review the agency's file. If the court finds from a review of the file that there was no just cause for the demotion or termination, the officer is entitled to a hearing de novo on the demotion or termination.
C. If the superior court finds that just cause for a demotion or termination did not exist, the court shall order the officer reinstated to the officer's previous position with the law enforcement agency and may award to the law enforcement officer monetary damages that shall not exceed the officer's combined total of wages and benefits during the period of imposed disciplinary action that was lost as a result of the demotion or termination.
D. An action pursuant to subsection A or B of this section shall be commenced within thirty‑five calendar days after a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed is served on the law enforcement officer.
E. In an action pursuant to subsection A or B of this section the court may award the successful party reasonable attorney fees as set forth in section 12‑341.01, subsection B C and shall award the successful party all costs pursuant to section 12‑341.
F. This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is employed as an at will employee:
1. As a police chief or an assistant police chief in a law enforcement agency.
2. By an agency of this state.