Sharon Crain-Hodge v. Sharnai Fisher ( 2022 )

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA
SHARON CRAIN-HODGE, ) Arizona Supreme Court
) No. CV-22-0105-AP/EL
Plaintiff/Appellee, )
) Maricopa County
v. ) Superior Court
) No. CV2022-004836
SHARNAI FISHER, et al., )
)
Defendants/Appellants. )
)
__________________________________) FILED 05/06/2022
DECISION ORDER
The Court, by a panel consisting of Vice Chief Justice
Timmer, Justice Bolick, Justice Lopez and Justice Beene, has
considered the briefs of the parties, the superior court’s
minute entry judgment, and the relevant statutes and case law in
this expedited election matter.
Candidate/Appellant Sharnai Fisher is running for a seat on
the Goodyear City Council in the primary election scheduled for
August 2, 2022. Appellee Sharon Crain-Hodge filed an action
challenging Appellant’s nominating petitions for lack of valid
signatures. Appellant moved to dismiss the action, arguing
Appellee had failed to comply with the service of process
requirements set forth in A.R.S. § 16-351(D). The superior
court denied the motion to dismiss, finding that the Goodyear
Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-22-0105-AP/EL
Page 2 of 3
City Clerk’s Office had the authority to accept service of
process on behalf of Appellant, including waiving any defects in
service or entering a voluntary appearance in court obviating
the need for formal service.
On April 27, 2022, the parties stipulated that Appellant
did not submit enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.
Appellant timely appealed, raising only the service issue
before this Court.
After consideration, the Court agrees with the superior
court that the Goodyear City Clerk’s Office had authority to
accept service of process on behalf of Appellant and waived any
defects in service by voluntarily appearing in court. See Ariz.
R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3)–(4); see also Montano v. Scottsdale Baptist
Hosp., Inc., 119 Ariz. 448, 452 (1978) (“It is a rule of ancient
and universal application that a general appearance by a party
who has not been properly served has exactly the same effect as
a proper, timely and valid service of process.”). Similarly,
Appellant generally appeared by participating in the status
conference and indicating her intention to withdraw from the
election, thereby waiving any defects in service of process.
See Montano, 119 Ariz. at 452.
Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-22-0105-AP/EL
Page 3 of 3
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED affirming the superior court’s judgment filed
April 27, 2022.
DATED this 6TH day of May, 2022.
___________/S/________________
ANN A. SCOTT TIMMER
Vice Chief Justice
TO:
David L Erlichman
Timothy A LaSota
Angela Lane
Karen J Hartman-Tellez
Joseph Branco
Joseph Eugene La Rue
Roric V Massey
Hon Sally Schneider Duncan
Hon Jeff Fine
Alberto Rodriguez
Alicia Moffatt