§ 7.3.5 Situations In Which Special Action Jurisdiction Is More Often Declined (Denial of Motion For Summary Judgment and Motion To Dismiss). In addition to the general tendency to decline jurisdiction when there is a remedy by appeal, appellate courts repeatedly have expressed a strong policy of declining special action jurisdiction to review the denial of motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. This is consistent with the policy that cases should be permitted to proceed through the regular appeal process, and special actions should not be viewed as a common alternative for appeal when there are no extraordinary circumstances justifying special action intervention in that process. See, e.g., City of Phoenix v. Yarnell, 184 Ariz. 310, 315, 909 P.2d 377, 382 (1995) (“[W]e disapprove of appellate special action proceedings to review trial court denials of partial summary judgment.”). In U.S. v. Superior Court, 144 Ariz. 265, 269, 697 P.2d 658, 662 (1985), the supreme court stated, “We have no inclination to provide a special method of interlocutory appeal from [orders denying motions to dismiss or for summary judgment] through grant of special action petitions, and we lack the capacity to handle the response that such an invitation undoubtedly would engender.” See also Shea v. Superior Court (Ariz. Pub. Serv. Co.), 150 Ariz. 271, 272, 723 P.2d 89, 90 (1986). As the court stated in Alhambra Sch. Dist. v. Superior Court (Nichols), 165 Ariz. 38, 40 n.3, 796 P.2d 470, 472 n.3 (1990), “[i]n general, appellate courts in Arizona follow a policy of declining jurisdiction when special action relief is sought” to compel a trial court to grant a motion for summary judgment. The supreme court was equally clear in Ft. Lowell-NSS Ltd. Partnership v. Kelly, 166 Ariz. 96, 800 P.2d 962 (1990). The court noted that because the court of appeals had granted special action relief in that case, it had taken almost two years and two appellate proceedings for the case to return to superior court for trial. Id. at 100, 800 P.2d at 966.
Notwithstanding this strong policy, appellate courts do accept special action review of the denial of summary judgment or a motion to dismiss in special circumstances. Orme Sch. v. Reeves, 166 Ariz. 301, 802 P.2d 1000 (1990), for example, the seminal case on the summary judgment standard, was presented to the supreme court as an original special action. Although Orme School was decided the same year as Ft. Lowell-NSS, the Orme School court found “the need to review and reconsider interpretations of our own rules, and...
