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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1803 (2026)

Times at which injunction may be granted; verified complaint required; service of copy of complaint or affidavits

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

A. An injunction may be granted at the time of commencing the action upon the complaint, and at any time afterward before judgment upon affidavits. The complaint or the affidavits shall set forth sufficient grounds therefor.

B. An injunction shall not be granted on the complaint unless it is verified by the oath of the plaintiff that he has read the complaint, or heard the complaint read, knows the contents thereof, and that it is true of his own knowledge, except the matters stated therein on information and belief, and that as to those matters, he believes the complaint to be true.

C. A copy of the complaint, or, when granted upon affidavit, a copy of the affidavit, shall be served with the injunction.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1978–2019 · leading case: Nu-Tred Tire Co. v. Dunlop Tire & Rubber Corp., 577 P.2d 268 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nu-Tred Tire Co. v. Dunlop Tire & Rubber Corp., 577 P.2d 268 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 20× “A.R.S. § 12-1803, having its origin in the revised statutes of 1901, reflects this.”
Barnet v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 590 P.2d 454 (Ariz. 1979). · cites it 4× “* * * Even if we assume that injunctive relief is requested herein, it does not appear that A.R.S. § 12-1803 applies. A reading of the section indicates it is limited to those instances where the petitioner is seeking injunctive relief prior to the judgment.”
Bryant v. Bloch Companies, 800 P.2d 33 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “section 12-1803(A), “[a]n injunction may be granted at the time of commencing the action upon the complaint, and at any time afterward before judgment upon affidavits.”
Foster v. Thunderbird Irrigation Water Delivery Dist., 609 P.2d 594 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “A proposal to shift all power expense to usage fees thus could violate the statute.”
Sw Fabrication v. Phoenix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-1803(B); Barnet v. Bd. of Med.”
Sw Fabrication v. Phoenix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-1803(B); Barnet v. Bd. of Med.”
Foster v. Thunderbird Irr. Water Del., Etc., 609 P.2d 594 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “A proposal to shift all power expense to usage fees thus could violate the statute.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1803(A) — 1 case
Bryant v. Bloch Companies, 800 P.2d 33 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “section 12-1803(A), “[a]n injunction may be granted at the time of commencing the action upon the complaint, and at any time afterward before judgment upon affidavits.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1803(B) — 5 cases
Barnet v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 590 P.2d 454 (Ariz. 1979). “* * * Even if we assume that injunctive relief is requested herein, it does not appear that A.R.S. § 12-1803 applies. A reading of the section indicates it is limited to those instances where the petitioner is seeking injunctive relief prior to the judgment.”
Foster v. Thunderbird Irrigation Water Delivery Dist., 609 P.2d 594 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). “A proposal to shift all power expense to usage fees thus could violate the statute.”
Sw Fabrication v. Phoenix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “A.R.S. § 12-1803(B); Barnet v. Bd. of Med.”
Sw Fabrication v. Phoenix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “A.R.S. § 12-1803(B); Barnet v. Bd. of Med.”
Foster v. Thunderbird Irr. Water Del., Etc., 609 P.2d 594 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). “A proposal to shift all power expense to usage fees thus could violate the statute.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1803(C) — 1 case
Bryant v. Bloch Companies, 800 P.2d 33 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “section 12-1803(A), “[a]n injunction may be granted at the time of commencing the action upon the complaint, and at any time afterward before judgment upon affidavits.”
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.