A. A person has notice of a fact if he has actual knowledge of it, has received a notice or notification of it or from all the facts and circumstances known to him at the time in question he has reason to know that it exists. A person "knows" or "has knowledge" of a fact if he has actual knowledge of it.
B. A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another by taking steps reasonably calculated to inform the other in ordinary course whether or not the other actually comes to know of it. A person "receives" a notice or notification when it comes to his attention, or in the case of the landlord, it is delivered in hand or mailed by registered or certified mail to the place of business of the landlord through which the rental agreement was made or at any place held out by him as the place for receipt of the communication or delivered to any individual who is designated as an agent by section 33-1322 or, in the case of the tenant, it is delivered in hand to the tenant or mailed by registered or certified mail to him at the place held out by him as the place for receipt of the communication or, in the absence of such designation, to his last known place of residence. If notice is mailed by registered or certified mail, the tenant or landlord is deemed to have received such notice on the date the notice is actually received by him or five days after the date the notice is mailed, whichever occurs first.
C. "Notice," knowledge or a notice or notification received by an organization is effective for a particular transaction from the time it is brought to the attention of the individual conducting the transaction and in any event from the time it would have been brought to his attention if the organization had exercised reasonable diligence.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2018–2023 · leading case:
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 12× “A.R.S. § 33-1313(A) (2019). In addition: A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another by taking steps reasonably calculated to inform the other in ordinary course whether or not the other actually comes to know of it.”
Deatcher v. Drake (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 8× “Drake moved to dismiss, arguing that the notice was not delivered as required by A.R.S. § 33-1313. The superior court denied Drake’s motion and the matter proceeded to trial, where the jury found that Deatcher was entitled to possession.”
Deatcher v. Drake (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 8× “Drake moved to dismiss, arguing that the notice was not delivered as required by A.R.S. § 33-1313. The superior court denied Drake’s motion and the matter proceeded to trial, where the jury found that Deatcher was entitled to possession.”
M2 Real Solutions v. Perry (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “1 ¶5 Under A.R.S. § 33-1313(B) (2018), Perry was deemed to have received M2's notice of termination on December 18.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1313(A) — 1 case
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“A.R.S. § 33-1313(A) (2019). In addition: A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another by taking steps reasonably calculated to inform the other in ordinary course whether or not the other actually comes to know of it.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1313(B) — 4 cases
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“A.R.S. § 33-1313(A) (2019). In addition: A person "notifies" or "gives" a notice or notification to another by taking steps reasonably calculated to inform the other in ordinary course whether or not the other actually comes to know of it.”
Deatcher v. Drake (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“Drake moved to dismiss, arguing that the notice was not delivered as required by A.R.S. § 33-1313. The superior court denied Drake’s motion and the matter proceeded to trial, where the jury found that Deatcher was entitled to possession.”
Deatcher v. Drake (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“Drake moved to dismiss, arguing that the notice was not delivered as required by A.R.S. § 33-1313. The superior court denied Drake’s motion and the matter proceeded to trial, where the jury found that Deatcher was entitled to possession.”
M2 Real Solutions v. Perry (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“1 ¶5 Under A.R.S. § 33-1313(B) (2018), Perry was deemed to have received M2's notice of termination on December 18.”
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.