32-2153. Grounds for denial, suspension or revocation of licenses; letters of concern; provisional license; retention of jurisdiction by commissioner; definitions
A. The commissioner may suspend or revoke a license, deny the issuance of a license, issue a letter of concern to a licensee, issue a provisional license or deny the renewal or the right of renewal of a license issued under this chapter if it appears that the holder or applicant, within five years immediately preceding, in performing or attempting to perform any acts authorized by the license or by this chapter, has:
1. Pursued a course of misrepresentation or made false promises, either directly or through others, whether acting in the role of a licensee or a principal in a transaction.
2. Acted for more than one party in a transaction without the knowledge or written consent of all parties to the transaction.
3. Disregarded or violated any of the provisions of this chapter or any rules adopted by the commissioner.
4. Knowingly authorized, directed, connived at or aided in the publication, advertisement, distribution or circulation of any material false or misleading statement or representation concerning the licensee's business or any land, cemetery property, subdivision or membership campground or camping contract offered for sale in this or any other state.
5. Knowingly used the term "real estate broker", "cemetery broker" or "membership camping broker" without the legal right to do so.
6. Employed any unlicensed salesperson or unlicensed associate broker.
7. Accepted compensation as a licensee for performing any of the acts specified in this chapter from any person who is not authorized to provide compensation pursuant to section 32-2155.
8. Represented or attempted to represent a broker other than the broker to whom the salesperson or associate broker is licensed.
9. Failed, within a reasonable time, to account for or to remit any monies, to surrender to the rightful owner any documents or other valuable property that comes into the licensee's possession and that belongs to others, or to issue an appraisal report on real property or cemetery property in which the licensee has an interest, unless the nature and extent of the interest are fully disclosed in the report.
10. Paid or received any rebate, profit, compensation or commission in violation of this chapter.
11. Induced any party to a contract to break the contract for the purpose of substituting a new contract with the same or a different principal, if the substitution is motivated by the personal gain of the licensee.
12. Placed a sign on any property offering it for sale or for rent without the written authority of the owner or the owner's authorized agent.
13. Solicited, either directly or indirectly, prospects for the sale, lease or use of real property, cemetery property or membership camping contracts through a promotion of a speculative nature involving a game of chance or risk or through conducting lotteries or contests that are not specifically authorized under this chapter.
14. Failed to pay to the commissioner the renewal fee as specified in this chapter promptly and before the time specified.
15. Failed to keep an escrow or trust account or other record of monies deposited with the licensee relating to a real estate transaction.
16. Commingled the monies or other property of the licensee's principal or client with the licensee's own or converted these monies or property to the licensee or another.
17. Failed or refused on demand to produce any document, contract, book, record, information, compilation or report that is in the licensee's possession or that the licensee is required by law to maintain concerning any real estate, cemetery or membership camping business, services, activities or transactions involving or conducted by the licensee for inspection by the commissioner or the commissioner's representative.
18. Failed to maintain a complete record of each transaction that comes within this chapter.
19. Violated the federal fair housing law, the Arizona civil rights law or any local ordinance of a similar nature.
20. Tendered to a buyer a wood infestation report in connection with the transfer of residential real property or an interest in residential real property knowing that wood infestation exists or that the wood infestation report was inaccurate or false as of the date of the tender or that an inspection was not done in conjunction with the preparation of the wood infestation report.
21. As a licensed broker, failed to exercise reasonable supervision over the activities of salespersons, associate brokers or others under the broker's employ or failed to exercise reasonable supervision and control over the activities for which a license is required of a corporation, limited liability company or partnership on behalf of which the broker acts as designated broker under section 32-2125.
22. Demonstrated negligence in performing any act for which a license is required.
23. Sold or leased a property to a buyer or lessee that was not the property represented to the buyer or lessee.
24. Violated any condition or term of a commissioner's order.
25. Signed the name of another person on any document or form without the express written consent of the person.
26. As a licensed school, failed to exercise reasonable supervision over the activities for which a license is required for an owner, director, administrator or instructor in the school's employ.
B. The commissioner may suspend or revoke a license, deny the issuance of a license, issue a letter of concern to a licensee, issue a provisional license or deny the renewal or the right of renewal of a license issued under this chapter if it appears that the holder or applicant has:
1. Procured or attempted to procure a license under this chapter for the holder or applicant or another by fraud, misrepresentation or deceit or by filing an original or renewal application that is false or misleading.
2. Been convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction in this or any other state of a felony or of any crime of forgery, theft, extortion, conspiracy to defraud, a crime of moral turpitude or any other like offense.
3. Made any substantial misrepresentation.
4. Made any false promises of a character likely to influence, persuade or induce.
5. Been guilty of any conduct, whether of the same or a different character than specified in this section, that constitutes fraud or dishonest dealings.
6. Engaged in the business of a real estate broker, cemetery broker or membership camping broker or real estate salesperson, cemetery salesperson or membership camping salesperson without holding a license as prescribed in this chapter.
7. Demonstrated incompetence to perform any duty or requirement of a licensee under or arising from this chapter. For the purposes of this paragraph, "incompetence" means a lack of basic knowledge or skill appropriate to the type of license the person holds or a failure to appreciate the probable consequences of the licensee's action or inaction.
8. Violated the terms of any criminal or administrative order, decree or sentence.
9. Violated any federal or state law, regulation or rule that relates to real estate or securities or that involves forgery, theft, extortion, fraud, substantial misrepresentation, dishonest dealings or violence against another person or failure to deal fairly with any party to a transaction that materially and adversely affected the transaction. This paragraph applies equally to violations of which the licensee was convicted in any lawful federal or state tribunal and to any admissions made in any settlement agreement by the licensee to violations.
10. Failed to respond in the course of an investigation or audit by providing documents or written statements.
C. A judgment based on a court's finding or stipulation of fraud by a licensee following a trial on the merits or a criminal conviction of a licensee that results in a payment from the real estate recovery fund is prima facie evidence of a violation and grounds for discipline under this section.
D. The commissioner may deny, suspend or revoke the issuance of a license on application by a corporation, a limited liability company or a partnership if it appears that an owner, officer, director, member, manager, partner, stockholder owning ten percent or more of the stock in the corporation or limited liability company or person exercising control of the entity is a current or former licensee whose license as a broker or a salesperson has been denied, suspended or revoked.
E. The lapsing or suspension of a license by operation of law or by order or decision of the commissioner or a court of law or the voluntary surrender of a license by a licensee does not deprive the commissioner of jurisdiction to do any of the following:
1. Proceed with any investigation of or action or disciplinary proceeding against the licensee.
2. Render a decision suspending or revoking the license or denying the renewal or right of renewal of the license.
3. Assess a civil penalty pursuant to section 32-2160.01.
F. For the purposes of this section:
1. "Letter of concern" means an advisory letter to notify a licensee that, while the conduct or evidence does not warrant disciplinary action, the commissioner believes that the licensee should modify or eliminate certain practices and that continuation of the activities may result in disciplinary action against the licensee.
2. "Provisional license" means a license that the department issues and that allows a licensee to practice subject to either a consent order as prescribed in section 32-2153.01 or the commissioner's terms, conditions and restrictions.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case:
Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 11× “Section 32-2153 lists twenty-five specific acts that permit suspension, revocation, or denial of license.”
Howard v. Nicholls, 621 P.2d 292 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 26× “At the time of the hearing before the Real Estate Department’s hearing officer, the remaining charges against appellant consisted of alleged violations of A.R.S. §§ 32-2153 A(16) 1 and 32-2153 B(4) 2 .”
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 23× “The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
Wetzel v. Arizona State Real Est. Dep't, 727 P.2d 825 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 14× “The Department sought the suspension or revocation of Wetzel’s real estate license pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-2153(A)(5), 32-2153(B)(4) and 32-2153(B)(5).”
Bear v. Nicholls, 691 P.2d 326 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 24× “The first argument presented is that a “conviction based upon a nolo contendere plea is not a ‘conviction’ for purposes of A.R.S. § 32-2153.” It is undisputed that appellant has been convicted of a felony in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.”
Brown v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 890 P.2d 615 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 9× “The decision as to the penalty to be imposed is vested by AR.S. § 32-2153 in the commissioner. Since there was substantial evi- *328 denee to support his decision to revoke, and revocation was one of the permissible dispositions authorized by the statute, we cannot conclude that…”
Focus point/kantor v. johnson/oak Acres, 330 P.3d 360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 7× “¶20 Viewing the statutory scheme as a whole, we conclude that the Legislature intended that a determination regarding whether a salesperson is qualified to obtain or maintain a license is to be made by the Real Estate Commissioner under § 32-2153(B). Although § 32-2152(A)…”
Parking Concepts, Inc. v. Tenney, 83 P.3d 19 (Ariz. 2004).
· cites it 3× “” A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(1) (Supp.2003). The statute does not require that the misrepresentations or false promises be intentional.”
Santorii v. MartinezRusso, LLC, 381 P.3d 248 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 3× “Brokers must maintain records of all transactions facilitated by salespersons and must review all real estate sales agreements. See A.”
Sherman v. First Am. Title Ins., 38 P.3d 1229 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “”) See also A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(7) (allowing suspension or revocation of salesperson’s license for accepting compensation “from any person other than the licensed broker to whom the licensee is licensed.”
State v. Heinze, 993 P.2d 1090 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “§ 32-1204 (1996) (automatic removal of a Dental Board member upon conviction of a felony); A.R.S. § 32-2153(B)(2) (West Supp.1998) (authorizing Real Estate Commissioner to suspend or revoke a license when it appears that the holder has been convicted of a felony or of specified…”
Martin v. Althoff, 557 P.2d 187 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 32-2153. It is the rule of statutory construction that courts will not read into a statute something which is not within the express manifest intention of the Legislature as gathered from the statute itself, and similarly the court will not inflate, expand, stretch…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A) — 2 cases
Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
“Section 32-2153 lists twenty-five specific acts that permit suspension, revocation, or denial of license.”
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(1) — 2 cases
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
Parking Concepts, Inc. v. Tenney, 83 P.3d 19 (Ariz. 2004).
“” A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(1) (Supp.2003). The statute does not require that the misrepresentations or false promises be intentional.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(16) — 2 cases
Bear v. Nicholls, 691 P.2d 326 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“The first argument presented is that a “conviction based upon a nolo contendere plea is not a ‘conviction’ for purposes of A.R.S. § 32-2153.” It is undisputed that appellant has been convicted of a felony in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(2) — 1 case
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(21) — 1 case
Santorii v. MartinezRusso, LLC, 381 P.3d 248 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“Brokers must maintain records of all transactions facilitated by salespersons and must review all real estate sales agreements. See A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(22) — 1 case
Parking Concepts, Inc. v. Tenney, 83 P.3d 19 (Ariz. 2004).
“” A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(1) (Supp.2003). The statute does not require that the misrepresentations or false promises be intentional.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(3) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(5) — 1 case
Wetzel v. Arizona State Real Est. Dep't, 727 P.2d 825 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
“The Department sought the suspension or revocation of Wetzel’s real estate license pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-2153(A)(5), 32-2153(B)(4) and 32-2153(B)(5).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(6) — 1 case
Brown v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 890 P.2d 615 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
“The decision as to the penalty to be imposed is vested by AR.S. § 32-2153 in the commissioner. Since there was substantial evi- *328 denee to support his decision to revoke, and revocation was one of the permissible dispositions authorized by the statute, we cannot conclude that…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(7) — 1 case
Sherman v. First Am. Title Ins., 38 P.3d 1229 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002).
“”) See also A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(7) (allowing suspension or revocation of salesperson’s license for accepting compensation “from any person other than the licensed broker to whom the licensee is licensed.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(A)(l) — 1 case
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B) — 2 cases
Focus point/kantor v. johnson/oak Acres, 330 P.3d 360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“¶20 Viewing the statutory scheme as a whole, we conclude that the Legislature intended that a determination regarding whether a salesperson is qualified to obtain or maintain a license is to be made by the Real Estate Commissioner under § 32-2153(B). Although § 32-2152(A)…”
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B)(2) — 3 cases
Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
“Section 32-2153 lists twenty-five specific acts that permit suspension, revocation, or denial of license.”
Bear v. Nicholls, 691 P.2d 326 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“The first argument presented is that a “conviction based upon a nolo contendere plea is not a ‘conviction’ for purposes of A.R.S. § 32-2153.” It is undisputed that appellant has been convicted of a felony in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.”
State v. Heinze, 993 P.2d 1090 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“§ 32-1204 (1996) (automatic removal of a Dental Board member upon conviction of a felony); A.R.S. § 32-2153(B)(2) (West Supp.1998) (authorizing Real Estate Commissioner to suspend or revoke a license when it appears that the holder has been convicted of a felony or of specified…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B)(3) — 1 case
Brown v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 890 P.2d 615 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
“The decision as to the penalty to be imposed is vested by AR.S. § 32-2153 in the commissioner. Since there was substantial evi- *328 denee to support his decision to revoke, and revocation was one of the permissible dispositions authorized by the statute, we cannot conclude that…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B)(4) — 1 case
Wetzel v. Arizona State Real Est. Dep't, 727 P.2d 825 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
“The Department sought the suspension or revocation of Wetzel’s real estate license pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-2153(A)(5), 32-2153(B)(4) and 32-2153(B)(5).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B)(5) — 2 cases
Sigmen v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 819 P.2d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“The Wileys lodged a formal grievance with the Arizona Department of Real Estate, which in turn sought suspension or revocation of Sigmen’s broker’s license pursuant to Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 32-2153 (1984). A Department hearing officer adjudicated the matter in August 1987.”
Bear v. Nicholls, 691 P.2d 326 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“The first argument presented is that a “conviction based upon a nolo contendere plea is not a ‘conviction’ for purposes of A.R.S. § 32-2153.” It is undisputed that appellant has been convicted of a felony in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(B)(7) — 1 case
Curtis v. Richardson, 131 P.3d 480 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
“Section 32-2153 lists twenty-five specific acts that permit suspension, revocation, or denial of license.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(D)(2) — 1 case
Brown v. Arizona Dep't of Real Est., 890 P.2d 615 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
“The decision as to the penalty to be imposed is vested by AR.S. § 32-2153 in the commissioner. Since there was substantial evi- *328 denee to support his decision to revoke, and revocation was one of the permissible dispositions authorized by the statute, we cannot conclude that…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-2153(E) — 1 case
Focus point/kantor v. johnson/oak Acres, 330 P.3d 360 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“¶20 Viewing the statutory scheme as a whole, we conclude that the Legislature intended that a determination regarding whether a salesperson is qualified to obtain or maintain a license is to be made by the Real Estate Commissioner under § 32-2153(B). Although § 32-2152(A)…”
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.