Humphrey & Petersen, P.C.

Humphrey and Petersen provides excellence in legal representation to professionals, businesses, municipalities, and insurers.

Operating as usual

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their address. 07/31/2021

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their address.

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their address.

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their phone number. 07/05/2021

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their phone number.

Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. updated their phone number.

[06/06/18]   Setting Aside Default Judgments
by Andrew. J. Petersen

The law favors resolving cases on their merits. Sometimes defendants fail to timely answer a lawsuit. The insured may provide notice to the insurance carrier, but for some reason, there is delay and an answer is not timely filed. Rule 60(b) allows a defendant to later move to set aside the default under certain circumstances. In deciding whether to set aside a judgment, the trial court may consider whether there was due diligence, excusable neglect, or a meritorious defense. Trial courts are given broad discretion. “Because the law favors resolution on the merits, all doubts are to be resolved in favor of the moving party and the trial court is given broad discretion to grant or deny relief. That discretion extends not only to the adequacy of the factual showing but also to the balancing in particular cases of the competing legal principles favoring finality of judgments and resolution on the merits.” Addison v. Cienega, Ltd., 146 Ariz. 322, 323, 705 P.2d 1373, 1374 (App. 1985).

[11/20/17]   Intent
by Andrew J. Petersen

In a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case involving the use of a canine to subdue a suspect, the Court discussed whether the intentional release of the canine was an intentional tort (battery) or was a consequence of a negligent act, i.e., a misperception of fact. The distinction was important because the court held the justification statutes for use of force by a law enforcement officer do not apply to a negligence claim but only to an intentional tort case such as battery. McDonald v. Napier (Division II, Arizona Court of Appeals, October 18, 2017). This decision raises a question of what exactly is an intentional tort and how is it different from negligence.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[08/22/17]   Too Trivial to Be Actionable
by Andrew J. Petersen

Recognizing the earth is not flat, New York’s premises liability law holds:

A property owner may not be cast in damages for negligent maintenance by reason of trivial defects on a walkway, not constituting a trap or nuisance as a consequence of which a pedestrian might merely stumble, stub his [or her] toes, or trip over a raised projection.

Chirumbolo v. 78 Exch. St., LLC, 137 A.D.3d 1358 (2016). This “too trivial to be actionable” doctrine holds that courts can decide as a matter of law the condition is not unreasonably dangerous by considering “such relevant factors as the dimensions of the alleged defect and the circumstances surrounding the injury, including the width, depth, elevation, irregularity, and appearance of the defect as well as the time, place, and circumstances of the injury.” Id. New York also rejects allowing a plaintiff to use the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility standards as a safety standard of care. Id. at 1360.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[06/12/17]   The Half Death of the Irreparable Injury Rule
by Andrew J. Petersen

The irreparable injury rule is based on a body of cases where courts have denied injunctive relief when the complainant has an adequate legal remedy, i.e., monetary damages. In 1990, Douglas Laycock wrote a law review article entitled The Death of the Irreparable Injury Rule, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 687 (1990). A year later, his research became a book, and he argues against use of the rule, quite convincingly. Professor Laycock concludes that the irreparable injury rule is misleading rhetoric because of the numerous cases where the meaning of “adequate” or “irreparable” is result oriented. The rule fosters inconsistency and an outdated hierarchy of remedies: “When a judge believes that the irreparable injury rule requires a wrong result, he may do what he thinks is right whether or not he can explain it.” The rule is not a significant barrier to equitable relief because the legal remedy is almost never adequate. Professor Laycock concludes that often damages are not adequate unless the law wants them to be.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[02/10/17]   Supreme Court Nominee Judge Gorsuch
by Andrew J. Petersen

I have reviewed several of Judge Gorsuch’s opinions from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals involving claims against public officials and governmental entities.The Supreme Court’s docket always includes several §1983 cases. Cases this term include: District of Columbia v. Wesby (Fourth Amendment claims against officers for citing partygoers for trespass); Manuel v. City of Joliet (Fourth Amendment claim and relationship to malicious prosecution); and County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (so-called Ninth Circuit provocation rule and Fourth Amendment). It is unlikely that Judge Gorsuch will be confirmed in time to participate in these cases. Manuel v. City of Joliet was argued back in October. County of Los Angeles v. Mendez will be argued March 22nd. I believe the standard practice is for a new justice not to participate in previously argued cases. Cases are argued through April.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[01/11/17]   The Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion
by Andrew J. Petersen

The standard CGL policy includes a “your work” exclusion stating that the insurance does not apply to property damage to “your work” arising out of or in any part of it and included in the products completed operations hazard. This exclusion prevents a general liability policy from becoming a performance bond by excluding the insured’s work. There is an exception to the exclusion when the work was performed by a subcontractor. Over the years, this exception to the “your work” exclusion has become one of the leading ways to find coverage for construction defects.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[11/17/16]   Qualified Immunity as a Civil Rights Defense
by Andrew J. Petersen

Qualified immunity is often the strongest defense in a civil rights lawsuit. In a case where an officer shot at a fleeing vehicle to try to disable it, but missed and hit the driver instead, the Supreme Court in Mullenix v. Luna, 136 S.Ct. 305, 308 (2015) reiterated:

"The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. A clearly established right is one that is sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right. We do not require a case directly on point, but existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate. Put simply, qualified immunity protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law."

When the law is not clearly established that an officer's actions violate a constitutional right, then he or she is entitled to the qualified immunity defense.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[09/15/16]   Combating Interference with Independent Medical Examinations
By Andrew J. Petersen

Recently, I was alerted to the continuing problem of plaintiffs’ attorneys who interfere with independent medical examinations (IMEs). When the mental or physical condition of a party is in controversy, the court may order that party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician or psychologist. Plaintiffs’ attorneys understand the significance of IMEs and look for ways to counter them. At times, they launch full-scale attacks on physicians. Resisting and interfering with IMEs occur in other ways as well. Insisting on videotaping the IME, insisting on having a representative present for the examination, and arguing over the scope of the IME are some tactics. Defense attorneys are able to fight these tactics in a variety of ways.

[09/02/16]   Defendant May Allocate Fault to Healthcare Provider who Negligently
Treats Injury

by Andrew J. Petersen

The Arizona Supreme Court recognized fault can be allocated to a healthcare provider who commits malpractice while treating an accident victim in Cramer v. Mungia, decided July 18, 2016. Under common law, the original tortfeasor doctrine recognized that an original tortfeasor who causes injury will be held liable for any additional injury caused by the concurrent or succeeding negligence of a third person which does not break the chain of causation. Thus, the original tortfeasor is a proximate cause of both the original and successive injuries, and she will be held liable for all injuries. In other words, if a plaintiff was injured in an accident and while seeking treatment for her injuries, a healthcare provider commits malpractice, the defendant would be held liable for all damages, including those caused by the malpractice.

[08/17/16]   Construction Related Litigation Insurance Coverage Issues in Arizona

By Andrew J. Petersen

Construction defect litigation and insurance coverage is a quagmire. There are longstanding disputes over policy language and exclusions, public policy concerns, and in every individual case, significant questions regarding causation and damages.

[07/11/16]   Freedom of Expression and the Marketplace of Ideas
By Andrew J. Petersen

Since we celebrated the Fourth of July last week, here are a few of my own thoughts on free speech. In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes explained freedom of expression and free speech by using a metaphor of the "marketplace of ideas." He correlated the necessity of free speech with free trade and competition in the marketplace. This free trade of ideas emerged from the printing presses in revolutionary America where the press challenged both economic and social relations. Justice Holmes declared: "Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power and want a certain result with all your heart you naturally express your wishes in law and sweep away all opposition . . . But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas."

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[07/01/16]   Parental Liability for Children's Actions
By Andrew J. Petersen

Children may by liable for both their negligent and intentional torts, although very young children (common law placed the age under seven years) may be deemed incapable. Parent(s) may also be held liable for their child's actions in several circumstances. These include:

1) Parent who signs driver's license application is jointly and severally liable, but only if vehicle is uninsured.

2) Parent who owns a vehicle and permits an unlicensed minor to drive is jointly and severally liable.

3) Family purpose doctrine.

4) Malicious and willful misconduct of minor child; liability is imputed to parent up to $10,000.

5) Parent may be liable for negligent supervision and negligent entrustment.

For the complete article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C. at [email protected], or call (520) 795-1900.

[05/24/16]   You Can't Say That! Criticizing Judges
By Andrew J. Petersen

Attorneys do not enjoy the same First Amendment right to criticize judges as do ordinary citizens. At least that is what the Arizona Supreme Court held over thirty years ago, long before Facebook, blogs, and the internet came to rule. Attorneys may be disciplined for making certain negative comments of judges. Arguments for this rule include the need to maintain public confidence in the judiciary, and attorneys necessarily give up certain rights when they become members of the Bar. See In re Riley, 142 Ariz. 604, 612-14 (1984); In re Snyder, 472 U.S. 634 (1985).

For the full article, contact Humphrey & Petersen, P.C., at [email protected] or call (520) 795-1900.

Find us online at


Humphrey & Petersen, P.C.'s cover photo


Humphrey & Petersen, P.C.




3861 E 3rd St
Tucson, AZ

Opening Hours

Monday 8:30am - 5pm
Tuesday 9am - 5pm
Wednesday 9am - 5pm
Thursday 9am - 5pm
Friday 9am - 5pm
Other Lawyers & Law Firms in Tucson (show all)
DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC
2525 E Broadway Blvd, Ste 200
Tucson, 85716

DeConcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, P.C., one of Southern Arizona's largest law firms with offices in Tucson and Phoenix.

The IPLP Human Rights Project at Ua-Unison The IPLP Human Rights Project at Ua-Unison
1201 East Speedway Blvd.
Tucson, 85721

This page is about the on going clinical projects that are under the auspices of the UA College of Law's International Environmental Law Clinic.

The Arnold IRS Tax Lawyers The Arnold IRS Tax Lawyers
Tucson, 85705

Call us today to begin your FREE CONSULTATION and get the help you deserve!

Moore, Masunas & Moore, PLLC Moore, Masunas & Moore, PLLC
135 S Stratford Dr
Tucson, 85716

Moore, Masunas & Moore handles family law and estate planning cases.

Canavan Law PLC Canavan Law PLC
3430 E. Sunrise Drive #130
Tucson, 85718

We are dedicated to finding our clients a solution that betters their lives. We understand that peace of mind is priceless.

Wood Law Firm, PLLC Wood Law Firm, PLLC
6837 N Oracle Rd, Ste 105
Tucson, 85704

Tucson Probate attorney Henry Wood of the Wood Law Firm provides remarkable personal attention, quick turn-around time, and reasonable cost for legal services in the Tucson Catalina Foothills community for years.

UA Latino Law Student Association UA Latino Law Student Association
Tucson, 85719

A student organization at the James E. Rogers College of Law

Global Investment Strategies Global Investment Strategies
3661 N Campbell Ave, Suite 210
Tucson, 85719

GLOBAL INVESTMENT STRATEGIES is a life insurance company that provides life insurance for businesses and individual clients.

Tribal In-House Counsel Association Tribal In-House Counsel Association
TICA, Attn: Virjinya Torrez, 7777 S. Camino Huivisim, Bldg. C
Tucson, 85757

TICA is national association that seeks to connect and provide practical resources to tribal in-house attorneys.

Cautela Corporation Cautela Corporation
5931 N. Oracle, Suite 209A
Tucson, 85704

The principal of Cautela Corporation, Marley Beard, is a licensed legal document preparer through the Arizona Supreme Court of Arizona; a certified legal assistant with the National Association of Legal Assistants;and a trained Mediator.

Thrasher Law Offices PLLC Thrasher Law Offices PLLC
Tucson, 85718

Thrasher Law Offices PLLC is a dynamic law firm equipped to help you meet your individual, small business and corporate needs.