Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 12

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173

Definition of forcible detainer; substitution of parties

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

There is a forcible detainer if:

1. A tenant at will or by sufferance or a tenant from month to month or a lesser period whose tenancy has been terminated retains possession after his tenancy has been terminated or after he receives written demand of possession by the landlord.

2. The tenant of a person who has made a forcible entry refuses for five days after written demand to give possession to the person upon whose possession the forcible entry was made.

3. A person who has made a forcible entry upon the possession of one who acquired such possession by forcible entry refuses for five days after written demand to give possession to the person upon whose possession the first forcible entry was made.

4. A person who has made a forcible entry upon the possession of a tenant for a term refuses to deliver possession to the landlord for five days after written demand, after the term expires. If the term expires while a writ of forcible entry applied for by the tenant is pending, the landlord may, at his own cost and for his own benefit, prosecute it in the name of the tenant.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: Rapp v. Olivo
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rapp v. Olivo (1986) arizctapp · cites it 15× “A person is guilty of forcible detainer if he willfully holds over any lands, tenements, or other real property after written demand for possession has been made by the person entitled to possession.”
Grady v. Barth (2013) arizctapp · cites it 6× “§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Curtis v. Morris (1996) ariz · cites it 4× “AR.S. § 12-1173 defines forcible detainer to include landlord-tenant relationships and other possessory situations.”
Alton v. Tower Capital Co. (1979) ariz · cites it 9× “It is clear to this Court that A.R.S. § 12-1173 was not intended to authorize this type of action.”
United Effort Plan Trust v. Holm (2004) arizctapp · cites it 2× “Section 12-1173 (2003) adds that there is a forcible detainer if: 1.”
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. De Meo (2011) arizctapp · cites it 2× “Under A.R.S. § 12-1173, there is a forcible detainer when a month-to-month tenant refuses to surrender possession of property “for five days after written demand.”
Andreola v. Arizona Bank (1976) arizctapp · cites it 3× “” One who remains in possession of property after termination of his interest under a deed of trust is a tenant at will or sufferance.”
Phoenix-Sunflower Industries, Inc. v. Hughes (1970) ariz · cites it 4× “) And by A.R.S. § 12-1173, subsec. A, par. 1: “A. There is a forcible detainer if: 1.”
Curtis v. Morris (1996) arizctapp · cites it 2× “In 1984, the legislature amended the FED chapter and defined additional situations that give rise to an FED action: In addition to other persons enumerated in this article, a person in any of the following cases who retains possession of any land, tenements or other real…”
Mason v. Cansino (1999) arizctapp · cites it 3× “FORCIBLE DETAINER BASED ON IRS DIRECTOR’S DEED ¶ 5 The Cansinos next assert that A.R.S. §§ 12-1173 and 12-1173.01 do not provide for a forcible detainer action based upon a deed from the IRS district director.”
Makalla v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CTY. OF MARICOPA (1978) ariz “Respondents further contend that petitioners were tenants by sufferance, that petitioners were given a written demand for possession under § 12-1173(A), and that forcible detainer was a proper remedy.”
Wholesale v. Montoya (2024) arizctapp · cites it 8× “Decision of the Court A.R.S. § 12-1173, Alton held that an FED proceeding cannot be commenced until five days after giving notice of a written demand for possession.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(1) — 9 cases
Grady v. Barth (2013) arizctapp “§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Rapp v. Olivo (1986) arizctapp “A person is guilty of forcible detainer if he willfully holds over any lands, tenements, or other real property after written demand for possession has been made by the person entitled to possession.”
Thompson v. Burton (2020) arizctapp
Socaa v. Dtt Acc (2021) arizctapp
Cruger v. Blansette (2022) arizctapp
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(A) — 1 case
Makalla v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CTY. OF MARICOPA (1978) ariz “Respondents further contend that petitioners were tenants by sufferance, that petitioners were given a written demand for possession under § 12-1173(A), and that forcible detainer was a proper remedy.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(A)(1) — 4 cases
Alton v. Tower Capital Co. (1979) ariz “It is clear to this Court that A.R.S. § 12-1173 was not intended to authorize this type of action.”
Grady v. Barth (2013) arizctapp “§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Rapp v. Olivo (1986) arizctapp “A person is guilty of forcible detainer if he willfully holds over any lands, tenements, or other real property after written demand for possession has been made by the person entitled to possession.”
Wholesale v. Montoya (2024) arizctapp “Decision of the Court A.R.S. § 12-1173, Alton held that an FED proceeding cannot be commenced until five days after giving notice of a written demand for possession.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(A)(2) — 1 case
Rapp v. Olivo (1986) arizctapp “A person is guilty of forcible detainer if he willfully holds over any lands, tenements, or other real property after written demand for possession has been made by the person entitled to possession.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.