Brimhall v. Brimhall — Court awarded appellate costs but excluded the superior-court filing fee

Case
Christopher Brimhall v. Julia Brimhall
Court
Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One
Judge
James B. Morse Jr. (Douglas Ducey, 2017)
Date Decided
July 23, 2026
Docket No.
1 CA-CV 25-0418 FC
Topics
Appellate costs; Filing fees; Family law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The Arizona Court of Appeals resolved the substantive issues in Christopher and Julia Brimhall’s family-law appeal in a separate memorandum decision issued on April 3, 2026. The court determined that Father was the successful party on appeal and awarded him costs under A.R.S. § 12-341 and Arizona Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 21.

Father timely submitted an affidavit seeking $1,420.82 in costs. That amount included the $123.90 fee he had paid to file his notice of appeal in superior court. Mother filed an untimely response to the affidavit.

The Court’s Holding

The Court of Appeals held that it could not award the cost of a notice-of-appeal filing fee paid to the superior court. A.R.S. § 12-331 permits the appellate court to award amounts paid to its own clerk and certain other enumerated appellate expenses, but it does not authorize the appellate court to award fees paid to the superior court.

The court noted that an earlier memorandum decision had described such a filing fee as a cost incurred on appeal, but explained that the statement was in tension with authority recognizing the superior court as the proper forum to decide costs incurred there. Because Father paid the $123.90 fee to the superior court, the Court of Appeals excluded it and awarded him the remaining $1,296.92.

Key Takeaways

  • The Arizona Court of Appeals may award only those costs authorized by A.R.S. § 12-331.
  • A notice-of-appeal fee paid to the superior court cannot be recovered through an appellate-court cost award.
  • The successful appellant received $1,296.92 rather than the requested $1,420.82.

Why It Matters

The decision clarifies which court may award particular expenses arising during an appeal. A party seeking reimbursement for a fee paid to the superior court should not include that fee as a recoverable cost before the Court of Appeals.

The memorandum decision is not precedential under Arizona Supreme Court Rule 111(c), but it provides practical guidance for preparing appellate cost affidavits and distinguishing superior-court expenses from costs recoverable in the appellate court.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top