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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-550 (2026)

General limitation

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

Actions other than for recovery of real property for which no limitation is otherwise prescribed shall be brought within four years after the cause of action accrues, and not afterward.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 59 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1961–2024 · leading case: Crook v. Anderson, 565 P.2d 908 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Crook v. Anderson, 565 P.2d 908 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 8× “We similarly reject appellant's contention that because the action has some relation to breach of fiduciary duty, it is transformed from a tort action to some other sort of action covered by our catch-all statute of limitations, A.R.S. § 12-550, providing a four-year statute of…”
Clark v. Airesearch Mfg. Co. of Arizona, Inc., 673 P.2d 984 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 7× “§ 12-542 governs claims for wrongful interference with contract instead of the four-year limitation period in A.R.S. § 12-550 and therefore find that these claims were properly dismissed.”
RANCH 57 v. City of Yuma, 731 P.2d 113 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 8× “Accordingly, we hold that A.R.S. § 12-550 is applicable to the instant case.”
Hall v. Romero, 685 P.2d 757 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “§ 12-543, which applies to actions grounded in fraud; or the four-year general statute, A.R.S. § 12-550, which applies to actions to which no other statute applies.”
Uni-Sys., LLC v. U.S. Tennis Ass'n, Inc., 350 F. Supp. 3d 143 (E.D.N.Y 2018). · cites it 2× “" Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-550 . The Amended Complaint plausibly alleges that the claim accrued within the statutory period.”
Occhino v. Occhino, 793 P.2d 1149 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 8× “The trial court dismissed Jeanne’s complaint, ruling that the action was barred by the four-year statute of limitations contained in A.R.S. § 12-550. ISSUES ON APPEAL - Jeanne argues that a partition action is not subject to a statute of limitations unless the cotenant has been…”
Cecil Lawter Real Est. Sch., Inc. v. Town & Country Shopping Ctr. Co., 694 P.2d 815 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 12-550 is applicable and provides that action must be brought within four years after the cause of action accrues.”
De Anza Land & Leisure Corp. v. Raineri, 669 P.2d 1339 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 5× “A general limitation is provided in A.R.S. § 12-550 which applies to all actions for which no specific limitation is otherwise provided: Actions other than for recovery of real property for which no limitation is otherwise prescribed shall be brought within four years after the…”
Third & Catalina Assocs. v. City of Phoenix, 895 P.2d 115 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “") § 12-550; Ranch 57 v. City of Yuma, 152 Ariz.”
Sato v. Van Denburgh, 599 P.2d 181 (Ariz. 1979). · cites it 2× “There are, we believe, three statutes which might apply: A.”
Hansen v. Stoll, 636 P.2d 1236 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “Appellants assert that this cause of action is within the four-year general limitation period of A.R.S. § 12-550 and is still actionable in the instant case.”
San Manuel Copper Corp. v. Redmond, 445 P.2d 162 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 4× “§ 12-550, the four-year statute, and that the amendment at the pre-trial hearing related back to the filing date of the filing of the complaint.”
Show all 59 citing cases →
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.