Skip to content
Back to skills

Az Quality Check Codearranger

ASecurity

Use to QC, review, or validate an Arizona court document before filing. Triggers: "quality check Arizona filing", "is my Arizona motion ready to file", "Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 compliance", "pre-filing review Arizona", "QC this Arizona document", "check this motion before I file it in Arizona", "validate this Arizona affidavit", "audit this Arizona packet", "is my Maricopa Superior Court motion ready". Runs two passes: (1) format pass — Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 caption, Rule 7.1 motion form, Rule 11 s...

  • 85 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added October 8, 2026
ai-agentspythongogit

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned October 8, 2026

npx -y skills add ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open --skill az-quality-check-codearranger --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Az Quality Check Codearranger?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Az Quality Check Codearranger
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/thomasmoreai-az-quality-check-codearranger/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/thomasmoreai-az-quality-check-codearranger)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

SKILL.md
---
name: az-quality-check-codearranger
title: Arizona Pre-Filing Quality Check
description: 'Use to QC, review, or validate an Arizona court document before filing. Triggers: "quality check Arizona filing", "is my Arizona motion ready to file", "Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 compliance", "pre-filing review Arizona", "QC this Arizona document", "check this motion before I file it in Arizona", "validate this Arizona affidavit", "audit this Arizona packet", "is my Maricopa Superior Court motion ready". Runs two passes: (1) format pass — Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 caption, Rule 7.1 motion form, Rule 11 signature with State Bar bar number, line numbering + footer + "Page X of Y", Rule 5 certificate of service; (2) content pass — affirmative defenses pleaded, correct rule set for forum (ARCP vs. ARFLP vs. JCRCP critical flag), required attachments including proposed form of order. Lighter touch than `az-fact-check`, which deep-dives evidentiary citations and sworn-vs-argued alignment.'
author: codearranger
author_url: https://github.com/codearranger/claude-legal/tree/main/plugins/az-court-docs/skills/az-quality-check
license: MIT
version: 0.1.0
execution_mode: open
jurisdiction: us
practice: litigation
language: en
---

# Arizona Pre-Filing Quality Check

> **NOT LEGAL ADVICE.** This skill detects errors in form and
> structural completeness. It does not assess substantive legal
> sufficiency. Verify against the current Arizona Rules of Civil
> Procedure and the local rules and administrative orders of the
> filing court before filing.

Use this skill as the **last step** before filing any Arizona court
document. Two passes, plus a packet-consistency sweep.

## A note on the rule set for the forum

Arizona has **three distinct trial-court rule sets**, and a filing
must conform to the one that governs its forum. Confirm the correct
set before the format pass:

- **Ariz. R. Civ. P. (ARCP)** — Superior Court civil actions
- **Ariz. R. Fam. Law P. (ARFLP)** — Superior Court family-law
  matters (dissolution, legal decision-making, parenting time,
  support); captions and pleading forms differ from ARCP
- **Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedure (JCRCP)** — Justice Court
  civil actions (including the small-claims division)

This skill checks the ARCP baseline by default; **flag a forum
mismatch as FAIL** and route family-law and Justice Court filings to
the matching rule set (`az-family-court`, `az-justice-courts`).

## Pass 1 — Format

For a generated filing, run `scripts/format-check.py` first:

```
python3 plugins/az-court-docs/scripts/format-check.py path/to/filing.docx
```

The format-check script validates the marketplace common-practice
defaults (US Letter, conventional margins, body font, double or 1.5x
spacing, footer with **document title + "Page X of Y"** pagination)
against the Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 / Rule 7.1 baseline. Where a value is
a local-rule or administrative-order matter, the script emits
**WARN** (not FAIL) — resolve those by checking the venue's local
rules. Resolve any **FAIL** before continuing.

### Format pass — non-`.docx` (markdown / text drafts)

Verify manually:

- **Caption (Rule 10(a))** — court and county (e.g., "IN THE SUPERIOR
  COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA / IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA"),
  party names with designations, **case number** and assigned
  division/judge, and the document title
- **Title** — identifying the document (e.g., "MOTION FOR SUMMARY
  JUDGMENT")
- **Numbered paragraphs (Rule 10(b))** — sequential, each averment
  limited to a single set of circumstances; separate counts where
  required
- **Motion form (Rule 7.1)** — states the relief sought, the grounds,
  and the supporting authority; oral-argument request, if any, noted
  per Rule 7.1
- **Signature block (Rule 11)** — name, address, telephone, email, and
  **State Bar of Arizona bar number** if an attorney, or the
  **"Self-Represented" / pro se** designation if not; the Rule 11
  signature certifies the filing
- **Certificate of Service (Rule 5)** — date, manner of service, and
  each recipient (and the AZTurboCourt e-service confirmation where
  e-filed)
- **Line numbering + footer present** with **"Page X of Y"** (the
  pleading-paper line numbering and footer are marketplace
  conventions — confirm the venue does not prohibit them)
- **Sensitive-data handling** — confirm the venue's redaction /
  sealed-document practice for protected identifiers before filing

## Pass 2 — Content

The content check applies the pro-se drafting framework. Citation
resolution is delegated to **az-fact-check**; this pass confirms the
component is structurally complete and that the correct forum rule set
governs.

### For a motion / brief:

- [ ] **Correct rule set** for the forum (ARCP / ARFLP / JCRCP)
- [ ] **Relief stated clearly** in the opening paragraph (Rule 7.1)
- [ ] **Rule or statute citation** that grants the relief (e.g.,
      Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56 summary judgment; Rule 12(b) dismissal;
      A.R.S. § ___)
- [ ] **Numbered factual paragraphs** with record cites (affidavit ¶,
      complaint ¶, exhibit, admission)
- [ ] **Application of controlling authority** — case law applied to
      the facts, not merely strung together (citations verified by
      `az-fact-check`)
- [ ] **Counter-arguments addressed**
- [ ] **Specific conclusion** — what exactly should the court do?
- [ ] **Proposed form of order attached / lodged** with the motion
      (see `az-submit-order`)
- [ ] **Oral-argument request** included or omitted per Rule 7.1, and
      hearing/response timing consistent with `az-deadlines`

### For an affidavit / declaration:

- [ ] **Personal-knowledge foundation** in the opening paragraph
- [ ] **Numbered factual paragraphs** — facts only, no argument
- [ ] **Exhibit references** match the attached exhibits
- [ ] **Jurat** — sworn before a notary, or an unsworn declaration
      under penalty of perjury where a declaration is permitted
- [ ] **Date and place** of execution
- [ ] For a **business-records** affidavit, the custodian /
      qualified-witness foundation under Ariz. R. Evid. 803(6)

### For a proposed form of order:

- [ ] **Caption identical** to the underlying motion (Rule 10(a))
- [ ] **Findings (if any) separate from the ordering clause**
- [ ] **Ordering clause mirrors** the motion's prayer for relief
- [ ] **Specific dates / amounts** filled in or bracketed for the judge
- [ ] **Judge signature line** at the foot; transmittal consistent with
      `az-submit-order`

### For an answer:

- [ ] **Each allegation of the complaint addressed** (admit / deny /
      lack of knowledge — no skipping) under Rule 8(c)
- [ ] **Affirmative defenses pleaded** under **Rule 8(d)** (statute of
      limitations, payment, lack of standing, etc.) — defenses not
      pleaded may be waived
- [ ] **Compulsory counterclaims** stated (Rule 13(a))
- [ ] **Timeliness** — answer deadline confirmed against the proof of
      service via `az-deadlines`

## Pass 3 — Packet consistency

If filing a packet (motion + affidavit + proposed order + certificate
of service):

- [ ] **Same caption** across all documents — court, county, party
      names, case number, assigned division/judge
- [ ] **Same document title** referenced in the certificate of service
      and the proposed order
- [ ] **Dates align** — certificate-of-service date matches the
      signature date on the motion; affidavit jurat date is consistent
- [ ] **Relief sought matches** between motion prayer and proposed
      order ordering clause (item by item)
- [ ] **All referenced exhibits** attached

## Pre-flight checklist

| Check | Done |
|-------|------|
| Correct forum rule set confirmed (ARCP / ARFLP / JCRCP) | ☐ |
| `scripts/format-check.py` run; no FAIL (WARN items confirmed against local rules) | ☐ |
| Caption shows correct court, county, party names, case number, division/judge (Rule 10(a)) | ☐ |
| Numbered paragraphs sequential (Rule 10(b)) | ☐ |
| Motion states relief, grounds, authority (Rule 7.1) | ☐ |
| Signature block has State Bar of Arizona bar number (attorney) or "Self-Represented" designation (Rule 11) | ☐ |
| Certificate of Service shows manner, date, recipients (Rule 5) | ☐ |
| Footer carries document title + "Page X of Y" | ☐ |
| Affirmative defenses pleaded (Rule 8(d)) | ☐ |
| Proposed form of order lodged with the motion | ☐ |
| Response / hearing timing confirmed via `az-deadlines` | ☐ |
| Local-rule page limit / chambers-copy practice confirmed for the venue | ☐ |
| `az-fact-check` deep audit run (if high-stakes filing) | ☐ |

## Common Arizona pre-filing failures

1. **Wrong rule set for the forum** — an ARCP-formatted pleading filed
   in a family-law or Justice Court matter; confirm ARCP vs. ARFLP vs.
   JCRCP first.
2. **Missing State Bar of Arizona bar number or pro se designation**
   in the Rule 11 signature block.
3. **Affirmative defenses not pleaded** — Rule 8(d) requires defenses
   be set forth; omitted defenses can be waived.
4. **No proposed form of order lodged** with a motion.
5. **Caption missing the case number or assigned division** required by
   Rule 10(a).
6. **Affidavit not actually sworn** — an un-notarized "affidavit"
   carries no evidentiary weight unless an unsworn declaration under
   penalty of perjury is permitted.

## Composition

- For the deep evidentiary-citation and sworn-vs-argued review:
  `az-fact-check`
- For the format baseline (Rule 10 / 7.1 / 11 / 5): `az-statewide-format`
- For drafting each component: `az-draft-motion`, `az-draft-declaration`,
  `az-draft-order`, `az-draft-note`
- For deadline arithmetic (response and hearing windows): `az-deadlines`
- For the correct forum rule set: `az-maricopa`, `az-pima`,
  `az-superior-courts`, `az-family-court`, `az-justice-courts`
- For the final filing step (AZTurboCourt assembly): `az-file-packet`

## References

- `az-statewide-format` for the Ariz. R. Civ. P. 10 / 7.1 / 11 / 5
  baseline and the local-rule page-limit caveat
- `az-law-references` for canonical Arizona rule and statute text
- Always confirm the current local rules and administrative orders of
  the filing court — this skill checks statewide components and flags
  local-practice items as WARN.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.