§ 5.6.2 Supplemental Relief.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 5.6.2 Supplemental Relief. A.R.S. § 12-1838 authorizes the court to grant further relief based on a declaratory judgment “whenever necessary or proper.” It provides that the application for such relief shall be by complaint or appropriate pleading to a court having jurisdiction to grant it. If the court finds that the application is sufficient it shall, “on reasonable notice, require any adverse party whose rights have been adjudicated by the declaratory judgment or decree, to show cause why further relief should not be granted forthwith.” Id.

Supplemental relief has taken many forms in the Arizona courts. In Adams v. Bear, 87 Ariz. 288, 350 P.2d 751 (1960), further relief in the form of a money judgment was entered in an action for declaratory relief, which the debtor had originally brought to test the validity of an assignment and determine how much it owed. In Starkovich v. Noye, 111 Ariz. 347, 529 P.2d 698 (1974), the court, in partial reliance on A.R.S. § 12-1838 , awarded punitive damages in a declaratory judgment action seeking reformation of a joint venture agreement. A declaratory judgment may provide that the plaintiffs can, from time to time, apply to the court for further instructions and relief as may be equitable and proper. Wineglass Ranches, Inc. v. Campbell, 12 Ariz. App. 571, 473 P.2d 496 (1970). In Bowen v. Watz, 5 Ariz. App. 519, 428 P.2d 694 (1967), the court imposed a constructive trust.

The Federal Declaratory Judgments Act has a provision analogous to A.R.S. § 12-1838 . See 28 U.S.C. § 2202 (1959). The procedure in federal court, like the procedure in state...