ARS 12-505 Interpretation
In Rutherford v. Babcock, 168 Ariz. 404, 406, 814 P.2d 361, 363 (App. 1991) the Court stated, "Under Arizona law, amended statutes must be given prospective effect to extend periods of time within which claims may be brought on causes of action existing at the time the amendment takes effect."
While, as noted above, that principle is indeed the general rule, Rutherford is not applicable for two reasons.
First, the Rutherford court was not considering "time fixed" as used in 12-505(B), but rather, the trial court's misinterpretation of the words "an action barred by pre-existing law" in 12-505(A) "to mean at the time the petition was filed, rather than at the time of the statutory amendment." 168 Ariz. at 406, 814 P.2d at 363.
Second, the petitioner in that case had a vested right in child support arrearages she was attempting to recover. Id.