Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 12
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-168 (2026)

Proceedings

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Proceedings before the court are original, independent proceedings and shall be tried de novo.

B. If an action is an appeal from an order or determination of an administrative agency, the action shall be an original proceeding in the nature of a suit to set aside the order or determination.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1989–1994 · leading case: Maricopa Cnty. v. Arizona Tax Court, 781 P.2d 41 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maricopa Cnty. v. Arizona Tax Court, 781 P.2d 41 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 5× “Maricopa County now argues, however, that Navopache Electric Co-op and the cases it followed have been superseded by A.R.S. § 12-168, effective September 30, 1988.”
Suncor Dev. v. Maricopa Cnty., 788 P.2d 136 (Ariz. T.C. 1990). · cites it 10× “Proceedings before the court are original, independent proceedings and shall be tried de novo. B. If an action is an appeal from an order or determination of an administrative agency, the action shall be an original proceeding in the nature of a suit to set aside the order or…”
Arizona Dep't of Revenue v. Superior Court, 796 P.2d 479 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “§ 12-166 (1988) provides that tax court proceedings shall be governed by the rules of civil procedure in superior court, and A.R.S. § 12-168(A) (1988) provides that the proceedings are original and shall be tried de novo.”
Allred v. Maricopa Cnty., 774 P.2d 1377 (Ariz. T.C. 1989). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-168. It is not a completely new trial, however.”
Parsons v. Maricopa Cnty., 860 P.2d 1360 (Ariz. T.C. 1993). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-168(A). Unless there is something contrary in the tax statutes (Chapter 1, Article 4 of Title 12, A.”
U.S. Xpress, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 867 P.2d 869 (Ariz. T.C. 1994). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 12-168(A). The Department is mistaken when it argues that this Court must review the Department’s actions under an abuse of administrative discretion standard.”
City of Mesa v. Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 803 P.2d 141 (Ariz. T.C. 1990). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 12-168 provides (A) Proceedings before the [Tax] court are original, independent proceedings and shall be tried de novo.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-168(A) — 4 cases
Arizona Dep't of Revenue v. Superior Court, 796 P.2d 479 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “§ 12-166 (1988) provides that tax court proceedings shall be governed by the rules of civil procedure in superior court, and A.R.S. § 12-168(A) (1988) provides that the proceedings are original and shall be tried de novo.”
Parsons v. Maricopa Cnty., 860 P.2d 1360 (Ariz. T.C. 1993). “A.R.S. § 12-168(A). Unless there is something contrary in the tax statutes (Chapter 1, Article 4 of Title 12, A.”
U.S. Xpress, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 867 P.2d 869 (Ariz. T.C. 1994). “” A.R.S. § 12-168(A). The Department is mistaken when it argues that this Court must review the Department’s actions under an abuse of administrative discretion standard.”
City of Mesa v. Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc., 803 P.2d 141 (Ariz. T.C. 1990). “A.R.S. § 12-168 provides (A) Proceedings before the [Tax] court are original, independent proceedings and shall be tried de novo.”
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.