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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-3006 (2026)

Validity of agreement to arbitrate

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

12-3006. Validity of agreement to arbitrate

A. An agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the revocation of a contract.

B. The court shall decide whether an agreement to arbitrate exists or a controversy is subject to an agreement to arbitrate.

C. An arbitrator shall decide whether a condition precedent to arbitrability has been fulfilled and whether a contract containing a valid agreement to arbitrate is enforceable.

D. If a party to a judicial proceeding challenges the existence of, or claims that a controversy is not subject to, an agreement to arbitrate, the arbitration proceeding may continue pending final resolution of the issue by the court, unless the court otherwise orders.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2012–2026 · leading case: Dueñas v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., 336 P.3d 763 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dueñas v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., 336 P.3d 763 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “The court entered an appealable order of dismissal with prejudice, and Dueñas timely appeals.”
Sun Valley Ranch 308 Ltd. P'ship v. Robson, 294 P.3d 125 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “¶ 9 A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: A agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the…”
Valer C. Austin v. Josiah T. Austin, 348 P.3d 897 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Scope of Trial Court’s Findings ¶ 32 Josiah argues the “trial court failed to limit itself to the questions of whether an arbitration agreement exists and whether the parties were bound by it.”
J Hamblen v. Hon. hatch/winslow Mem'l, 398 P.3d 99 (Ariz. 2017). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-3006(0 (“An arbitrator shall decide .”
Gullett ex rel. Est. of Gullett v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C., 390 P.3d 378 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-3006(A), “[a]n agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the…”
Falcone Bros. & Assocs. v. City of Tucson, 381 P.3d 276 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “2015), quoting A.R.S. § 12-3006(A), such as substantive uncon-scionability.”
Turley v. Beus, No. 1 CA-CV 15-0107, 2017 WL 410976 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2017). · cites it 8× “In defining the validity and enforceability of an arbitration agreement, A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: An agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and…”
Andrich v. Thrasher, No. 1 CA-CV 25-0112 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 12, 2026). · cites it 6× “¶25 The superior court here acknowledged that Andrich’s amended complaint (which sought to invoke arbitration) was the operative pleading, found the engagement agreement’s arbitration clause created an obligation to arbitrate, and in fact addressed arbitrability of the Referred…”
Duncan v. Pub. Storage, 507 P.3d 509 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “4 ¶13 Under the separability doctrine, an “arbitration clause is considered to be an agreement independent and separate from the principal contract.” U.S. Insulation, Inc.”
McGill v. Ball, 519 P.3d 729 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “Indeed, contract defenses can affect the enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate.”
Carey v. K&M, No. 1 CA-CV 13-0357 (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 2, 2014). · cites it 9× “Compare A.R.S. § 12-3006, with Uniform Act § 6. Comment 2 to section 6 of the Uniform Act, provides that the section was: intended to incorporate the holdings of the vast majority of state courts and the law that has developed under the [Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”)] that, in…”
Phoenix-Tucson v. Deetz, No. 1 CA-CV 14-0780 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 19, 2017). · cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 12-3006(A). documentation, including the entities’ general subsidiary ledgers and journals.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-3006(A): 19 cases
Gullett ex rel. Est. of Gullett v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C., 390 P.3d 378 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017). “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-3006(A), “[a]n agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the…”
Dueñas v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., 336 P.3d 763 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “The court entered an appealable order of dismissal with prejudice, and Dueñas timely appeals.”
Sun Valley Ranch 308 Ltd. P'ship v. Robson, 294 P.3d 125 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “¶ 9 A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: A agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the…”
Falcone Bros. & Assocs. v. City of Tucson, 381 P.3d 276 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “2015), quoting A.R.S. § 12-3006(A), such as substantive uncon-scionability.”
Valer C. Austin v. Josiah T. Austin, 348 P.3d 897 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). “Scope of Trial Court’s Findings ¶ 32 Josiah argues the “trial court failed to limit itself to the questions of whether an arbitration agreement exists and whether the parties were bound by it.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-3006(B): 9 cases
Dueñas v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., 336 P.3d 763 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “The court entered an appealable order of dismissal with prejudice, and Dueñas timely appeals.”
Sun Valley Ranch 308 Ltd. P'ship v. Robson, 294 P.3d 125 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “¶ 9 A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: A agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and irrevocable except on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the…”
Turley v. Beus, No. 1 CA-CV 15-0107, 2017 WL 410976 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2017). “In defining the validity and enforceability of an arbitration agreement, A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: An agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and…”
Phoenix-Tucson v. Deetz, No. 1 CA-CV 14-0780 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 19, 2017). “” A.R.S. § 12-3006(A). documentation, including the entities’ general subsidiary ledgers and journals.”
Phoenix-Tucson v. Deetz, No. 1 CA-CV 14-0780 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 28, 2017).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-3006(C): 2 cases
Turley v. Beus, No. 1 CA-CV 15-0107, 2017 WL 410976 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2017). “In defining the validity and enforceability of an arbitration agreement, A.R.S. § 12-3006(A) states: An agreement contained in a record to submit to arbitration any existing or subsequent controversy arising between the parties to the agreement is valid, enforceable and…”
Carey v. K&M, No. 1 CA-CV 13-0357 (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 2, 2014). “Compare A.R.S. § 12-3006, with Uniform Act § 6. Comment 2 to section 6 of the Uniform Act, provides that the section was: intended to incorporate the holdings of the vast majority of state courts and the law that has developed under the [Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”)] that, in…”
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.