A. In an action for possession based upon nonpayment of the rent or in an action for rent where the tenant is in possession, if the landlord is not in compliance with the rental agreement or this chapter, the tenant may counterclaim for any amount which he may recover under the rental agreement or this chapter. In that event after notice and hearing the court from time to time may order the tenant to pay into court all or part of the undisputed rent accrued and all periodic rent thereafter accruing and shall determine the amount due to each party. The party to whom a net amount is owed shall be paid first from the money paid into court and the balance, if any, by the other party. However, if no rent remains due after application of this section, or if the tenant is adjudged to have acted in good faith and satisfies a judgment for rent entered for the landlord, judgment shall be entered for the tenant in the action for possession.
B. In an action for rent where the tenant is not in possession, the tenant may counterclaim as provided in subsection A but the tenant is not required to pay any rent into court.
Notes of Decisions
Mead, Samuel & Co., Inc. v. Dyar, 622 P.2d 512 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 8× “The question presented is how to reconcile the apparent conflict between A.R.S. § 33-1365 4 which now permits some counterclaims in forcible detainer actions and the prior case law which interprets A.”
United Effort Plan Trust v. Holm, 101 P.3d 641 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Exceptions do exist for counterclaims made under A.R.S. § 33-1365(A), which arise out of a rental agreement or the ARLTA.”
Harrington v. Rodriguez (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 3× “¶13 Section 33-1365 does not apply here for at least two reasons.”
Matthews v. Bridge III Az Onnix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 33-1365(A). This statute “permit[s] adjudication by counterclaim of specified liabilities arising from the rental agreement or by statutes regulating the landlord-tenant relationship.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1365(A) — 3 cases
United Effort Plan Trust v. Holm, 101 P.3d 641 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
“Exceptions do exist for counterclaims made under A.R.S. § 33-1365(A), which arise out of a rental agreement or the ARLTA.”
Matthews v. Bridge III Az Onnix (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
“” A.R.S. § 33-1365(A). This statute “permit[s] adjudication by counterclaim of specified liabilities arising from the rental agreement or by statutes regulating the landlord-tenant relationship.”
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.