Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-204 (2026)

Acceptance of gifts and grants; gifts and grants fund; use; unexpended monies

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The state board of education may accept gifts or grants of monies or real or personal property from public and private organizations, if the purpose of the gift or grant specified by the donor is approved by the board and is within the scope of the board's powers and duties. There is established a fund for the placement of such monies which shall be designated as the gift and grant fund.

B. Any such monies received by the state board shall be placed in the appropriate gift and grant fund and expended for the purpose specified by the donor.

C. If all or part of the monies accepted by the board from a donor are not expended prior to the end of the fiscal year in which the gift or grant was accepted, the balance of the amount donated shall remain in the gift or grant fund until needed for the purpose specified by the donor.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1970–1981 · leading case: Burnkrant v. Saggau, 470 P.2d 115 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Burnkrant v. Saggau, 470 P.2d 115 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 15× “After a hearing, the writ was granted, the trial judge indicating in his remarks from the bench his view that (1) suspension by order of a person other than the principal was invalid under A.R.S. § 15-204, set forth infra, and (2) that suspension was an arbitrarily excessive…”

Godbey v. Roosevelt Sch. Dist. No. 66, Etc., 638 P.2d 235 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 15-204(A) (now A.R.S. § 15-843(E)) (granting superintendent authority to suspend pupil); Burn-krant v.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-204(A) — 1 case

Godbey v. Roosevelt Sch. Dist. No. 66, Etc., 638 P.2d 235 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981). “A.R.S. § 15-204(A) (now A.R.S. § 15-843(E)) (granting superintendent authority to suspend pupil); Burn-krant v.”

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.