12-1173. Definition of forcible detainer; substitution of parties; rules; applicability
A. 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 on whose possession the forcible entry was made.
3. A person who has made a forcible entry on the possession of one who acquired such possession by forcible entry:
(a) Refuses for five days after written demand to give possession to the person on whose possession the first forcible entry was made; or
(b) Refuses after a reasonable request to leave and to give possession to the person on whose possession the first forcible entry was made if all of the following apply:
(i) The requesting person is the property owner or the property owner's authorized agent.
(ii) The property includes a residential dwelling or is being used for residential purposes.
(iii) An unauthorized person is unlawfully occupying the property.
(iv) The property owner has directed the unauthorized person to leave.
(v) The property was not open to the public at the time the unauthorized person entered the property.
(vi) The unauthorized person is not a current or former tenant at that property.
(vii) The unauthorized person did not have a prior verbal or written agreement to cohabitate with the property owner in that residential dwelling.
(viii) The unauthorized person is not an immediate family member of the property owner.
(ix) There is no litigation pending between the property owner and the unauthorized person.
4. A person who has made a forcible entry on 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, at his own cost and for his own benefit, may prosecute it in the name of the tenant.
B. The supreme court shall adopt rules to allow for the expeditious resolution of claims consistent with this section. For a forcible detainer action brought pursuant subsection A, paragraph 3, subdivision (b) of this section against an unauthorized person, a writ of restitution shall be issued immediately after the court signs any judgment against the unauthorized person.
C. This section does not apply to or modify the rights and remedies available to landlords and tenants pursuant to title 33, chapter 10.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
26
cases (
10 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case:
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
· 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, 312 P.3d 117 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 6× “§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Curtis v. Morris, 925 P.2d 259 (Ariz. 1996).
· cites it 4× “AR.S. § 12-1173 defines forcible detainer to include landlord-tenant relationships and other possessory situations.”
Alton v. Tower Capital Co., 601 P.2d 602 (Ariz. 1979).
· cites it 9× “It is clear to this Court that A.R.S. § 12-1173 was not intended to authorize this type of action.”
Bank of New York Mellon v. De Meo, 254 P.3d 1138 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
· 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, 550 P.2d 110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976).
· 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.”
Curtis v. Morris, 909 P.2d 460 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996).
· 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, 990 P.2d 666 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· 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, 579 P.2d 39 (Ariz. 1978).
“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, No. 1 CA-CV 24-0157 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 7, 2024).
· cites it 8× “§ 12-1173.01(A)(2), which governs a forcible detainer after a trustee sale.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(1): 9 cases
Grady v. Barth, 312 P.3d 117 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
“§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
“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.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(A): 1 case
Makalla v. Superior Court of Cty. of Maricopa, 579 P.2d 39 (Ariz. 1978).
“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., 601 P.2d 602 (Ariz. 1979).
“It is clear to this Court that A.R.S. § 12-1173 was not intended to authorize this type of action.”
Grady v. Barth, 312 P.3d 117 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
“§ 12-1173(A)(1) (1956); AR.S. § 12-1173 (2003). See also Ariz. Civ.”
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
“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, No. 1 CA-CV 24-0157 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 7, 2024).
“§ 12-1173.01(A)(2), which governs a forcible detainer after a trustee sale.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1173(A)(2): 1 case
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
“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.