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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1401 (2026)

Short title

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

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Arizona mobile home parks residential landlord and tenant act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: In Re: Steven R. Drummond, Mary A. Drummond, 543 P.3d 1022 (Ariz. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re: Steven R. Drummond, Mary A. Drummond, 543 P.3d 1022 (Ariz. 2024). · cites it 2× “See generally A.R.S. §§ 33-1401 to -1419 (“Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act”).”
Manufactured Hous. Communities v. State, 13 P.3d 183 (Wash. 2000). “Arizona — Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 33-1401 to 33-1492 (West 2000).”
One Hundred Eighteen Members of Blue Sky Mobile Home Owners Ass'n v. Murdock, 682 P.2d 422 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “The issue on this appeal is whether the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, A.R.S. §§ 33-1401 through 33-1491, requires a landlord of a mobile home park to negotiate with the park's tenants concerning the amount of a proposed increase in rent.”
Morgan v. City of Phoenix, 785 P.2d 101 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “The trial court also granted summary judgment against plaintiffs’ claims that the City converted their trailer and violated their rights under the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, A.R.S. §§ 33-1401 to 1491 (1987). We uphold summary judgment on all…”
Contempo-tempe Mobile Home Owners v. Steinert, 696 P.2d 1376 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Therefore the case is moot, there is no case or controversy before this court, *229 and the appellants are merely seeking an advisory opinion concerning their capacity to sue for violations of the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act.”
Guertin v. Dixon, 864 P.2d 1072 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Appellants, a group of lessees at Quail Ridge Estates mobile home park in Pima County, appeal from the trial court’s summary judgment ruling that the statute of limitations precludes their cause of action for a violation of the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and…”
Contempo-Tempe Mobile Home Owners Ass'n v. Steinert, 696 P.2d 1376 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Therefore the case is moot, there is no case or controversy before this court, *229 and the appellants are merely seeking an advisory opinion concerning their capacity to sue for violations of the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act.”
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.