MARK B. v. ADES, R.D.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE MARK B., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC ) SECURITY, R.D., ) ) Appellees. ) ) DIVISION ONE FILED: 9/26/2013 RUTH A. WILLINGHAM, CLERK BY: mjt 1 CA-JV 13-0132 DEPARTMENT B Maricopa County Superior Court No. JS12371 JS12376 DECISION ORDER This court has an independent duty to determine whether it has jurisdiction. Sorenson v. Farmers Ins. Co., 191 Ariz. 464, 465, 957 P.2d 1007, 1008 (App. 1997). consider appeals not timely filed. We lack jurisdiction to Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. JS-1009, 26 Ariz. App. 518, 518, 549 P.2d 613, 613 (1976). Rule 104 of the Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court requires an appeal to be filed no later than 15 days after the final order is filed with the clerk. Here, the juvenile court entered the final order on June 3, 2013. Father filed a premature notice of appeal on May 21, 2013. Nevertheless, both parties assert we have jurisdiction under Craig v. Craig, 227 Ariz. 105, 107, ¶ 13, 253 P.3d 624, 626 (2011) ( a limited exception to the final judgment rule . . . allows a notice of appeal to be filed after the trial court has made its decision, but before it has entered a formal judgment, if no decision of the court could change and the only remaining task is merely ministerial. In all other cases, a notice of appeal filed in the absence of a final judgment . . . is ineffective and a nullity. ) (emphasis omitted) (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). Assuming, without deciding, Craig applies here, the remaining tasks were more than ministerial 1 thus making Father s notice of appeal a nullity. IT IS ORDERED dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. /s/ PATRICIA K. NORRIS, Judge 1 When Father filed his notice of appeal, the juvenile court still had to rule on the motion for summary judgment [as to paternity] filed by the Arizona Department of Economic Security ( ADES ) and approve and enter the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order lodged by ADES on May 9, 2013. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.