§ 5.3.2 A Declaratory Judgment Must Terminate the Controversy.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 5.3.2 A Declaratory Judgment Must Terminate the Controversy. Both the federal and state declaratory judgments acts have been interpreted as grants of authority to the courts, endowing them with discretion to entertain the remedy. Public Service Commission v. Wycoff Co., 344 U.S. 237, 73 S. Ct. 236, 97 L. Ed. 291 (1952) ; Pena v. Fullinwider, 124 Ariz. 42, 601 P.2d 1326 (1979) ³ . In exercising that discretion, the courts consider several factors, including whether the judgment will terminate the controversy, whether other remedies are available and whether other actions that will settle the controversy are already pending. Other factors discussed in § 5.3.5, infra, may cause a court to exercise its discretion and refuse to issue any declaration in particular situations. Professor Borchard, who was instrumental in the drafting of the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act from which Arizona’s statutes are derived, perhaps summarized the principles guiding the exercise of the court’s discretion best:

The two principal criteria guiding the policy in favor of rendering declaratory judgments are (1) when the judgment will serve a useful purpose in clarifying and settling the legal relations in issue, and (2) when it will terminate and afford relief from the uncertainty, insecurity and controversy giving rise to the proceeding.

E. Borchard, Declaratory Judgments 299 (2d ed...