THE FIRST OPPOSING COUNSEL YOUR DISCOVERY MEETS WORKS FOR YOU
The Discovery War Room (Arizona)
Every other tool tells you your request is fine. The Self-Audit Mirror reads it the way the other side's counsel would — re-keyed to Arizona: is it proportional under 26(b)(1), does it fit inside the tier budget (26.2), does the response state what 37(a)(4) demands — because in Arizona an evasive answer IS a failure to answer — and did the consultation happen before the motion (7.1(h))?
The scope signal
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1)
Nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense AND proportional to the needs of the case — considering the importance of the issues at stake, the amount in controversy, the parties' relative access to relevant information, the parties' resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense outweighs the likely benefit.
The budget signal it enforces — the tier caps, per side
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26.2(f)
Tier 1 — simple cases
5h · 5 rogs · 5 RFPs · 10 RFAs · 120d
Tier 2 — intermediate complexity
15h · 10 rogs · 10 RFPs · 10 RFAs · 180d
Tier 3 — complex cases
30h · 20 rogs · 10 RFPs · 20 RFAs · 240d
The response signals it hunts
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 37(a)
- Talk first is written into the rule: the compel motion must attach a good-faith consultation certificate complying with Rule 7.1(h).
- An evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response is treated as a FAILURE to disclose, answer, or respond (Rule 37(a)(4)).
- Expenses follow the fight: if the motion is granted — or the discovery arrives only after filing — the court may require payment of the movant's expenses after an opportunity to be heard (Rule 37(a)(5)).
Deterministic checks — reproducible, never simulated. Legal information, not legal advice; the call stays yours.