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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-438 (2026)

Sale of property subject to certain liens and encumbrances

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

A. As used in this section, "lien or encumbrance" does not include taxes or assessments, reservations in patents, easements, rights-of-way, reservation of mineral rights, covenants, conditions or restrictions.

B. The sale of any lot or parcel of property which is subject to a lien or encumbrance or when the interest of the seller is held under option or contract of purchase or in trust, shall be voidable by the buyer, unless there is a provision in the instrument evidencing the lien, encumbrance, option, contract or trust agreement, or in a valid supplementary agreement, assuring that the buyer will receive title free of the lien, encumbrance, option, contract or trust agreement, upon completion of all payments and performances of all the terms and provisions required to be made or performed by the buyer.

C. The buyer's right to void such sale may not be exercised if he has in fact received title, free of such lien, encumbrance, option, contract or trust. Any action to void such sale shall be commenced either within two years after discovery or after completion of all payments and performance of all terms and provisions required to be made or performed by the buyer, whichever occurs first, and not thereafter.

D. The buyer's right to void such sale shall be in addition to and shall not affect any other legal or equitable remedy.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2021–2021 · leading case: Watson v. Leisure World (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Watson v. Leisure World (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 4× “§ 33-420 that could not have been identified under A.R.S. § 33-438. See, e.g., Summit Int’l LLC v.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-438(A): 1 case
Watson v. Leisure World (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “§ 33-420 that could not have been identified under A.R.S. § 33-438. See, e.g., Summit Int’l LLC v.”
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.