Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-321 (2026)

Permission required for person other than holder of certificate of purchase to make improvements; forfeiture for failure to obtain permission; report of improvements

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Except as otherwise provided in section 37-323, if a lessee, a permittee or other person having a legal interest in state lands, other than a holder of a certificate of purchase, desires to construct or make improvements upon the lands, he shall first file with the department an application for permission to construct or make the improvements unless improvement authorization is contained within the terms of the lease. The application shall be allowed or rejected as the best interest of the state requires as determined by the department. Unless permission is granted by the department, the applicant shall not be entitled to reimbursement or compensation for improvements placed upon the state lands. Upon expiration or cancellation of the lessee's lease or permit, improvements placed on the land without approval shall be forfeited and become the property of the state.

B. The owner of improvements placed upon state lands by a lessee, a permittee or any other person having a legal interest in state lands shall prior to December 31, 1965, unless such time is extended by the department, report to the department in writing the description of the improvements, their location and the actual current cash value thereof. The improvements reported as provided by this subsection shall be allowed or rejected as the best interest of the state requires as determined by the department.

C. Improvements placed on state land granted to the territory of Arizona by the act of Congress approved January 27, 1894, or placed on land to which the state gains title by any determination, by a person who is not a lessee or permittee may be reported to the department after the person becomes a lessee or permittee. The improvements shall be allowed or rejected as the best interests of the state require, as determined by the department.

D. The department may, from time to time, but not more frequently than once a year, require from any lessee or permittee or the person having a legal interest in state lands information concerning the improvements. Failure to make the report shall, in the discretion of the department, subject the improvements to forfeiture to the state.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1964–2009 · leading case: Koepnick v. Arizona State Land Dep't, 212 P.3d 62 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Koepnick v. Arizona State Land Dep't, 212 P.3d 62 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “"It was undoubtedly the intention of the legislature in enacting A.R.S. § 37-321 to restrict and prevent a lessee from putting expensive improvements on the leased premises for which he must be reimbursed by a subsequent purchaser or lessee, but which would be of little use for…”

San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Superior Court, 972 P.2d 179 (Ariz. 1999). “¶ 57 Subsection (B) of § 37-321,01 allows the state land commissioner and the person asserting the right to stipulate to ownership of the water right, and the stipulation must be accepted by DWR.”

State Land Dep't v. Painted Desert Park, Inc., 428 P.2d 424 (Ariz. 1967). · cites it 7× “” A.R.S. § 37-321, subsection A, provides: “If a lessee, permittee or other person having a legal interest in state lands, other than a holder of a certificate of purchase, desires to construct or make improvements upon or use the lands for purposes other than provided in the…”

Williams v. Greene, 390 P.2d 907 (Ariz. 1964). “Did the Commissioner’s order, later affirmed by the lower court, granting a commercial lease on all of this particular short section to one applicant consider the best interests of the State of Arizona and its people? The controlling factor in granting a lease of state land to…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-321(A) — 1 case

Koepnick v. Arizona State Land Dep't, 212 P.3d 62 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “"It was undoubtedly the intention of the legislature in enacting A.R.S. § 37-321 to restrict and prevent a lessee from putting expensive improvements on the leased premises for which he must be reimbursed by a subsequent purchaser or lessee, but which would be of little use for…”

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.