§ 3.7.2.6.4.4 Jurisdiction and Finality.
In Personam Jurisdiction. Appellate courts review the issue of the trial court’s jurisdiction over the person de novo. See Davis v. Davis, 230 Ariz. 333, 335, ¶ 13, 283 P.3d 23, 25 (App. 2012); Duckstein v. Wolf, 230 Ariz. 227, 233, ¶ 19, 282 P.3d 428, 433 (App. 2012); Ariz. Tile, L.L.C. v. Berger, 223 Ariz. 491, 493, ¶ 8, 224 P.3d 988, 990 (App. 2010). They look to the nonmoving party to make a prima facie showing of jurisdiction. In doing so, the appellate courts view the facts bearing on jurisdiction in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Van Heeswyk v. Jabiru Aircraft Pty., Ltd., 229 Ariz. 412, 416, ¶ 6, 276 P.3d 46, 50 (App. 2012); Holland v. Hurley, 221 Ariz. 552, 555, ¶¶ 2, 4, 212 P.3d 890, 893 (App. 2009).
This is true even if the parties filed documents outside of the complaint and the superior court appeared to consider those documents in its ruling. See Bohreer v. Erie Ins. Exch., 216 Ariz. 208, 211, ¶ 7, 165 P.3d 186, 189 (App. 2007). However, when the superior court dismisses for lack of jurisdiction without conducting an evidentiary hearing, the appellate court will accept as true the uncontradicted facts put forward by the defendants. See Planning Grp. of Scottsdale, L.L.C. v. Lake Mathews Mineral Props., Ltd., 226 Ariz. 262, 264 n.1, 246 P.3d 343, 345 n.1 (2011); Beverage v. Pullman & Comley, LLC, 232 Ariz. 414, 416 n.1, ¶ 2, 306 P.3d 71, 73 n.1 (App. 2013).
Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The appellate court also reviews the issue of subject matter jurisdiction de novo. See Beatie v. Beatie, 235 Ariz. 427, 430, ¶ 14, 333 P.3d 754, 757 (App. 2014); Angel B. v. Vanessa J., 234 Ariz. 69, 71, ¶ 5, 316 P.3d 1257, 1259 (App. 2014); Glover v. Glover, 231 Ariz. 1, 6, ¶ 18, 289 P.3d 12, 17 (App. 2012) (subject matter jurisdiction independently reviewed as matter of law); Duwyenie v. Moran, 220 Ariz. 501, ¶ 7, 207 P.3d 754, 756 (App. 2009). If a judgment or order is void, the trial court has no discretion but to vacate it. See Duckstein v. Wolf, 230 Ariz. 227, 231, 233, ¶¶ 8, 18, 282 P.3d 428, 432, 434 (App. 2012). The court of appeals reviews de novo trial court rulings involving questions of pure law, including the trial court’s jurisdiction to enter its orders. See Engel v. Landman, 221 Ariz. 504, 508, ¶ 10, 212 P.3d 842, 846 (App. 2009). See also § 3.2.1.
Dismissals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction are reviewed de novo. See Church of Isaiah v. La Paz Cty., 233 Ariz. 460, 462, ¶ 9, 314...
