Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 33
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1368 (2026)

Noncompliance with rental agreement by tenant; failure to pay rent; utility discontinuation; liability for guests; definition

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

33-1368. Noncompliance with rental agreement by tenant; failure to pay rent; utility discontinuation; liability for guests; definition

A. Except as provided in this chapter, if there is a material noncompliance by the tenant with the rental agreement, including material falsification of the information provided on the rental application, the landlord may deliver a written notice to the tenant specifying the acts and omissions constituting the breach and that the rental agreement will terminate on a date not less than ten days after receipt of the notice if the breach is not remedied in ten days. For the purposes of this section, material falsification includes the following untrue or misleading information about the:

1. Number of occupants in the dwelling unit, pets, income of the prospective tenant, social security number and current employment listed on the application or lease agreement.

2. Tenant's criminal records, prior eviction record and current criminal activity. Material falsification of information in this paragraph is not curable under this section.

If there is a noncompliance by the tenant with section 33-1341 materially affecting health and safety, the landlord may deliver a written notice to the tenant specifying the acts and omissions constituting the breach and that the rental agreement will terminate on a date not less than five days after receipt of the notice if the breach is not remedied in five days. However, if the breach is remediable by repair or the payment of damages or otherwise, and the tenant adequately remedies the breach before the date specified in the notice, the rental agreement will not terminate.  If there is an additional act of these types of noncompliance of the same or a similar nature during the term of the lease after the previous remedy of noncompliance, the landlord may institute a special detainer action pursuant to section 33-1377 ten days after delivery of a written notice advising the tenant that a second noncompliance of the same or a similar nature has occurred. If there is a breach that is both material and irreparable and that occurs on the premises, which may include an illegal discharge of a weapon, homicide as prescribed in sections 13-1102, 13-1103, 13-1104 and 13-1105, prostitution as defined in section 13-3211, criminal street gang activity as prescribed in section 13-105, activity as prohibited in section 13-2308, the unlawful manufacturing, selling, transferring, possessing, using or storing of a controlled substance as defined in section 13-3451, threatening or intimidating as prohibited in section 13-1202, assault as prohibited in section 13-1203, acts that have been found to constitute a nuisance pursuant to section 12-991 or a breach of the lease agreement that otherwise jeopardizes the health, safety and welfare of the landlord, the landlord's agent or another tenant or involving imminent or actual serious property damage, the landlord may deliver a written notice for immediate termination of the rental agreement and shall proceed under section 33-1377. The foregoing list of actions which may constitute a material and irreparable breach of a tenant's lease is not exhaustive.

B. A tenant may not withhold rent for any reason not authorized by this chapter. If rent is unpaid when due and the tenant fails to pay rent within five days after written notice by the landlord of nonpayment and the landlord's intention to terminate the rental agreement if the rent is not paid within that period of time, the landlord may terminate the rental agreement by filing a special detainer action pursuant to section 33-1377. Before the filing of a special detainer action the rental agreement shall be reinstated if the tenant tenders all past due and unpaid periodic rent and a reasonable late fee set forth in a written rental agreement. After a special detainer action is filed the rental agreement is reinstated only if the tenant pays all past due rent, reasonable late fees set forth in a written rental agreement, attorney fees and court costs. After a judgment has been entered in a special detainer action in favor of the landlord, any reinstatement of the rental agreement is solely in the discretion of the landlord.

C. The landlord may recover all reasonable damages resulting from noncompliance by the tenant with the rental agreement or section 33-1341 or occupancy of the dwelling unit, court costs, reasonable attorney fees and all quantifiable damage caused by the tenant to the premises.

D. The landlord may discontinue utility services provided by the landlord on the day following the day that a writ of restitution or execution is executed pursuant to section 12-1181. Disconnections shall be performed only by a person authorized by the utility whose service is being discontinued. This section does not supersede standard tariff and operational procedures that apply to any public service corporation, municipal corporation or special districts providing utility services in this state.

E. On the day following the day that a writ of restitution or execution is executed pursuant to section 12-1181, the landlord shall comply with section 33-1370, subsections D, E, F, G, H and I regarding the tenant's personal property.

F. For the purposes of this chapter, the tenant shall be held responsible for the actions of the tenant's guests that violate the lease agreement or rules or regulations of the landlord if the tenant could reasonably be expected to be aware that such actions might occur and did not attempt to prevent those actions to the best of the tenant's ability.

G. For the purposes of this section, "days" means calendar days.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rapp v. Olivo, 718 P.2d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 6× “§ 12-1173(1) indicates that a tenant from month-to-month or a lesser period whose tenancy has been terminated as provided in A.R.S. § 33-1368 is guilty of forcible detainer without the necessity of presenting a written demand for possession.”
Found. Dev. Corp. v. Loehmann's, Inc., 788 P.2d 1189 (Ariz. 1990). · cites it 2× “The Act was the product of efforts in the 1970s by legal scholars to bring about broad legislative reform of landlord-tenant law in cases involving residential property.”
City of Phoenix v. Bellamy, 736 P.2d 1175 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 33-1368(A). However, a public housing lease such as the one at issue is specifically excluded from the Act’s coverage.”
Mason v. Cansino, 990 P.2d 666 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. §§ 33-1368(C) and 33-1315. The trial court did award attorney’s fees to the Masons.”
DVM Co. v. Bricker, 672 P.2d 933 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), which applies to residential leases, provides that the landlord may re-enter upon a “material noncompliance” by the tenant of a lease provision.”
Keenen v. Biles, 17 P.3d 111 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “Under section 33-1377 a landlord has available to him any of the remedies listed under section 33-1368. Specifically, sections 33-1368(B) and (C) state: B.”
DVM CO. v. Bricker, 672 P.2d 933 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 33-361 provides, "When a tenant * * * violates any provision of the lease, the landlord * * * may re-enter and take possession * * *.”
Found. Dev. Corp. v. Loehmann's, Inc., 780 P.2d 1074 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), which applies to residential leases, provides that the landlord may re-enter upon a ‘material noncompliance’ by the tenant of a lease provision.”
Univ. Cmty. Props. v. New Riverside Cafe, 268 N.W.2d 573 (Minn. 1978). “186, § 11 (1977 Supp.); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 40.360 (1975). 6 .”
Karolina Barrera v. Sedona Pointe LLC. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 12× “Reasoning that Barrera could have cured her nonpayment any time before entry of special detainer judgment under A.R.S. § 33-1368(B), the court implicitly concluded the notice here complied with § 9058(c).”
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “Decision of the Court the alternative, special detainer under A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), (B) (2019).1 Nacim moved to dismiss, arguing improper notice and that the superior court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the eviction because the parties had made a purchase agreement,…”
Soughar v. Montoya (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “¶5 In March 2022, Soughar filed this fifth eviction action based upon Montoya’s failure to pay rent under A.R.S. § 33-1368 and again sought 2 SOUGHAR v.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1368(A): 9 cases
Found. Dev. Corp. v. Loehmann's, Inc., 788 P.2d 1189 (Ariz. 1990). “The Act was the product of efforts in the 1970s by legal scholars to bring about broad legislative reform of landlord-tenant law in cases involving residential property.”
City of Phoenix v. Bellamy, 736 P.2d 1175 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “” A.R.S. § 33-1368(A). However, a public housing lease such as the one at issue is specifically excluded from the Act’s coverage.”
DVM Co. v. Bricker, 672 P.2d 933 (Ariz. 1983). “A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), which applies to residential leases, provides that the landlord may re-enter upon a “material noncompliance” by the tenant of a lease provision.”
DVM CO. v. Bricker, 672 P.2d 933 (Ariz. 1983). “§ 33-361 provides, "When a tenant * * * violates any provision of the lease, the landlord * * * may re-enter and take possession * * *.”
Found. Dev. Corp. v. Loehmann's, Inc., 780 P.2d 1074 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). “A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), which applies to residential leases, provides that the landlord may re-enter upon a ‘material noncompliance’ by the tenant of a lease provision.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1368(B): 6 cases
Univ. Cmty. Props. v. New Riverside Cafe, 268 N.W.2d 573 (Minn. 1978). “186, § 11 (1977 Supp.); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 40.360 (1975). 6 .”
Karolina Barrera v. Sedona Pointe LLC. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026). “Reasoning that Barrera could have cured her nonpayment any time before entry of special detainer judgment under A.R.S. § 33-1368(B), the court implicitly concluded the notice here complied with § 9058(c).”
Colosi v. Nacim (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Decision of the Court the alternative, special detainer under A.R.S. § 33-1368(A), (B) (2019).1 Nacim moved to dismiss, arguing improper notice and that the superior court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the eviction because the parties had made a purchase agreement,…”
Soughar v. Montoya (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). “¶5 In March 2022, Soughar filed this fifth eviction action based upon Montoya’s failure to pay rent under A.R.S. § 33-1368 and again sought 2 SOUGHAR v.”
Lux Prop. v. Hughes (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1368(C): 1 case
Mason v. Cansino, 990 P.2d 666 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999). “See A.R.S. §§ 33-1368(C) and 33-1315. The trial court did award attorney’s fees to the Masons.”
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.