Rule 5.Consolidation
Part I. General Administration · Last amended January 1, 2019 · Last verified September 4, 2026
Full Text of Rule 5
Rule History
Added Aug. 30, 2018, effective Jan. 1, 2019.
Editors' Notes
COMMENT TO 2019 AMENDMENT
States--like Arizona--that accept federal grant funds under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) cannot publish anything on the Internet that would reveal the name or location of a plaintiff in a protective order proceeding. To ensure that Arizona courts comply, effective January 1, 2017, Rule 123(g)(1)(E)(ii)-(iii), Rules of the Supreme Court, has incorporated language similar to the federal law. VAWA does not prohibit consolidation of cases, but Rule 5 does. However, if a domestic relations case and a protective order case are joined for hearing, then the court must take great care to ensure that no references to the protective order are published on the court's public access website. A family law minute entry cannot refer to the existence of a protective order if the minute entry is available to the public on the Internet. The case record, even if it displays only case data, cannot include the plaintiff's surname, and even the case title must be redacted to shield the plaintiff's surname. There is a distinction between case information available on the Internet and case information available at the courthouse. A person asking to inspect the record at a courthouse will have access to the plaintiff's name in the protective order proceeding, and possibly that person's address, unless the court has made this information confidential.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 5 has a permission and a prohibition, and the prohibition is the one to know.
When consolidation is available
If pending cases involve a common child, common parties, or a common question of law or fact, the court may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all matters at issue, or may consolidate the cases outright. Note the first of those three — a common child is enough, without common parties.
The motion is heard by the judge assigned to the first-filed case. The court may enter orders under the rule to avoid unnecessary costs or delay, or to serve the best interest of a minor child — a ground the civil consolidation rule has no equivalent of.
Orders of protection
Subsection (a)(4) is flat: the court may not consolidate a case involving an order of protection with a family law case, but may conduct a joint hearing.
The Editors' Note explains why, and it is worth reading. States that accept federal grant funds under the Violence Against Women Act cannot publish anything online revealing the name or location of a plaintiff in a protective order proceeding. Consolidation would merge the case records. A joint hearing does not — but the note warns that where the two are heard together, the court must take great care that no reference to the protective order reaches the public access website, that a minute entry available online cannot mention the order's existence, and that even the case title must be redacted to shield the plaintiff's surname.
Mechanics
On consolidation the first-filed case number controls and the clerk files everything further under that number only. Unless the court orders otherwise, consolidation is for all purposes, not only for a hearing or trial.
Subsection (c) handles the duplicate-petition problem: where consolidated cases include a petition in one that substantially responds to the opposing party's petition in another, the responding petition is treated as a response unless the court orders a further one.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an order of protection case be consolidated with a divorce?
No. Rule 5(a)(4) provides that the court may not consolidate a case involving an order of protection with a family law case, but may conduct a joint hearing.
What has to be common between the cases?
Rule 5(a)(1) allows consolidation where pending cases involve a common child, common parties, or a common question of law or fact.
Which judge hears the motion to consolidate?
Rule 5(a)(2) assigns it to the judge assigned to the first-filed case.
Which case number survives?
Rule 5(b) makes the first-filed case number the controlling number, and requires the clerk to file all further filings under that number only. Unless the court orders otherwise, consolidation is for all purposes and not only for conducting a hearing or trial.
Do I have to respond to a petition twice if cases are consolidated?
Rule 5(c) provides that where a party in one case has filed a petition that substantially responds to an opposing party's petition in another, the petition will be treated as a response unless the court orders a further response.