Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to az.docketdrift.com

Live · Arizona

Arizona

Free, searchable Arizona case law — no account, no paywall.

Opinions of the Arizona Supreme Court and the Arizona Court of Appeals (both divisions), 1866–present. A public-records project.

Codestin Search App Area chart of the Arizona corpus by filing year. Coverage runs from 1866 to 2025, peaking in 2017 with 1,034 opinions. 1870 1900 1930 1960 1990 2025

Opinions per year, 1866–2025 · busiest year 2017 (1,034)

  • Free & open Every opinion, free to read and search. No account, no paywall, no charge per search.
  • Private by design We never store your searches — there is no research history to subpoena, sell, or leak.
  • The court's own words Holdings and quotes come straight from the opinion, verbatim. We never paraphrase or generate legal text.
  • 37,879 opinions indexed
  • 169 judges (35 currently seated)
  • 1866–2026 date range
  • 16 legal topics to browse

Most recent activity

All opinions →
Docket Court Filed Disposition Case
CV-25-0233-SA Ariz. 2026-09-14 Tyler Strang v. malay/hernandez
1 CA-IC 26-0009 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026-09-10 Affirmed Halloum v. Black diamond/federal Insurance Co
1 CA-MH 26-0022 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026-09-10 Affirmed In Re: Mh 2025-012702
1 CA-CV 25-0966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026-09-10 Affirmed LIVING UNITED v. STATE
CV-25-0028-PR Ariz. 2026-09-10 Reversed and remanded ACCURSIO v. TREE HOUSE

What you can do here

  • Search by keyword or by concept. Full-text search across every opinion, plus semantic search that finds cases by idea, not just matching words.
  • Jump straight to a citation. Paste a reporter or docket citation and go directly to the opinion.
  • See how a case has been treated. For any opinion, see which later cases cite it — and whether they followed, distinguished, or overruled it.
  • Read the holding in the court's own words. The operative holding, quoted verbatim and linked to the paragraph it came from.
  • Study the bench. Per-judge dossiers with voting record, dissent rate, and frequent co-panelists.

About this corpus

DocketDrift Arizona collates published opinions from the Arizona appellate courts, normalizes them into a structured archive, and surfaces patterns for human review. Source material is in the public record; our role is collation, not interpretation.

Each opinion shows whether it has been reviewed by an editor (cyan dot) or only machine-processed (amber dot). Filtered date defaults to the last 10 years — expand to the full archive via the toggle on the search page.

Read more about methodology →