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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1832 (2026)

Power to construe, etc

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

Any person interested under a deed, will, written contract or other writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract, or franchise and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 68 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1966–2026 · leading case: City of Surprise v. acc/lake Pleasant, 437 P.3d 865 (Ariz. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Surprise v. acc/lake Pleasant, 437 P.3d 865 (Ariz. 2019). · cites it 4× “Further, standing is suggested by Arizona’s declaratory judgment statute, which provides that a party whose “rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute” may seek declaratory relief regarding the statute’s construction.”
Home Builders Ass'n of Cent. Ariz. v. Kard, 199 P.3d 629 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “To reconcile the statutes, we assume that the more specific language of § 49-497 controls and that § 12-1832 governs procedural aspects of a claim.”
McMann v. City of Tucson, 47 P.3d 672 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “Declaratory judgment is available “to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”
Ponderosa Fire Dist. v. Coconino Cnty., 334 P.3d 1256 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “¶ 16 Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1832, a party “whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise may have [a court] determine[ ] .”
Keggi v. Northbrook Prop. & Cas. Ins., 13 P.3d 785 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument .”
Yes on Prop 200 v. Napolitano, 160 P.3d 1216 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute .”
Canyon Del Rio Investors, L.L.C. v. City of Flagstaff, 258 P.3d 154 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “¶ 18 Arizona’s Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (the “Act”), A.”
Town of Gilbert v. Maricopa Cnty., 141 P.3d 416 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 12-1832 (2003). Ripeness is analogous to standing because the “doctrine prevents a court from rendering a premature judgment or opinion on a situation that may never occur.”
Dobson v. State Ex Rel App Court Appointments, 309 P.3d 1289 (Ariz. 2013). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-1832; cf. Merrill v. Phelps, 52 Ariz.”
HOME BUILDERS ASS'N v. City of Maricopa, 158 P.3d 869 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Concurring: JOHN PELANDER, Chief Judge and GARYE L. VÁSQUEZ, Judge.”
Land Dep't v. O'Toole, 739 P.2d 1360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-1832; Morris v. Fleming, 128 Ariz.”
Morris v. Fleming, 625 P.2d 334 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 3× “Therefore, we conclude that the appellant herein is not a “party affected * * * by the statute” within the meaning of A.R.S. § 12-1832. Further, we find that the claim fails to set forth sufficient allegations to state a claim for relief, i.”
Show all 68 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1832(2003) — 1 case
Home Builders Ass'n of Cent. Ariz. v. Kard, 199 P.3d 629 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “To reconcile the statutes, we assume that the more specific language of § 49-497 controls and that § 12-1832 governs procedural aspects of a claim.”
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.