§ 5.4.1 Who May Bring Declaratory Judgment Actions.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 5.4.1 Who May Bring Declaratory Judgment Actions. As stated in § 5.3.1 supra, one of the elements of a justiciable controversy is a plaintiff with a real stake in the outcome. A declaratory judgment action can be brought only by an interested party. 28 U.S.C. § 2201 (1994); Podol v. Jacobs, 65 Ariz. 50, 173 P.2d 758 (1946). Earlier cases evidence a restricted view of the kind of interest that would entitle a plaintiff to declaratory relief. See, e.g., Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. McKay, 225 F.2d 924, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1955) (competing utility lacked standing to challenge government program that aided competitor); Riley v. County of Cochise, 10 Ariz. App. 55, 59, 455 P.2d 1005, 1009 (1969). See also Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 733 & n.4, 92 S. Ct. 1361, 1365 & n.4, 31 L. Ed. 2d 636 (1972). More recent cases have a broader view.

Certainly, an economic interest will suffice. Anthony A. Bianco, Inc. v. Hess, 86 Ariz. 14, 339 P.2d 1038 (1959). The interest of a consumer in having adequate price information also will suffice. Pena v. Fullinwider, 124 Ariz. 42, 601 P.2d 1326 (1979) . Legal ownership is another sufficient interest. Western Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Robinson, 14 Ariz. App. 393, 483 P.2d 806 (1971). A plaintiff’s interest in future employment is sufficient. Rivera v. City of Douglas, 132 Ariz. 117, 644 P.2d 271 (Ct. App. 1982). An indenture trustee, that might have been under an obligation to make additional distributions under a bond indenture if an improper disbursement were recovered, had sufficient standing to seek a declaratory judgment concerning the propriety of the disbursement. Citibank (Arizona) v. Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc., 168 Ariz. 178, 812 P.2d 996 (Ct. App. 1990). A putative father’s interest in visitation rights was...