Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.02 (2026)

Appealable agency actions; application of procedural rules; exemption from article

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. This article applies to all contested cases as defined in section 41-1001 and all appealable agency actions, except contested cases with or appealable agency actions of:

1. The state department of corrections.

2. The board of executive clemency.

3. The industrial commission of Arizona.

4. The Arizona corporation commission.

5. The Arizona board of regents and institutions under its jurisdiction.

6. The state personnel board.

7. The department of juvenile corrections.

8. The department of transportation, except as provided in title 28, chapter 30, article 2.

9. The department of economic security except as provided in section 46-458.

10. The department of revenue regarding:

(a) Income tax or withholding tax.

(b) Any tax issue related to information associated with the reporting of income tax or withholding tax unless the taxpayer requests in writing that this article apply and waives confidentiality under title 42, chapter 2, article 1.

11. The board of tax appeals.

12. The state board of equalization.

13. The state board of education, but only in connection with contested cases and appealable agency actions related to either:

(a) Applications for issuance or renewal of a certificate and discipline of certificate holders and noncertificated persons pursuant to sections 15-203, 15-505, 15-534, 15-534.01, 15-535, 15-545 and 15-550.

(b) The Arizona empowerment scholarship account program pursuant to title 15, chapter 19.

14. The board of fingerprinting.

15. The department of child safety except as provided in sections 8-506.01 and 8-811.

B. Unless waived by all parties, an administrative law judge shall conduct all hearings under this article, and the procedural rules set forth in this article and rules made by the director apply.

C. Except as provided in subsection A of this section:

1. A contested case heard by the office of administrative hearings regarding taxes administered under title 42 shall be subject to section 42-1251.

2. A final decision of the office of administrative hearings regarding taxes administered under title 42 may be appealed by either party to the director of the department of revenue, or a taxpayer may file and appeal directly to the board of tax appeals pursuant to section 42-1253.

D. Except as provided in subsections A, B, E, F and G of this section and notwithstanding any other administrative proceeding or judicial review process established in statute or administrative rule, this article applies to all appealable agency actions and to all contested cases.

E. Except for a contested case or an appealable agency action regarding unclaimed property, sections 41-1092.03, 41-1092.08 and 41-1092.09 do not apply to the department of revenue.

F. The board of appeals established by section 37-213 is exempt from:

1. The time frames for hearings and decisions provided in section 41-1092.05, subsection A, section 41-1092.08 and section 41-1092.09.

2. The requirement in section 41-1092.06, subsection A to hold an informal settlement conference at the appellant's request if the sole subject of an appeal pursuant to section 37-215 is the estimate of value reported in an appraisal of lands or improvements.

G. Auction protest procedures pursuant to title 37, chapter 2, article 4.1 are exempt from this article.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: Sw. Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Env't Quality, 976 P.2d 872 (Ariz. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sw. Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Env't Quality, 976 P.2d 872 (Ariz. 1999). · cites it 12× “Thus, if rehearing was to be required for them, it would have had to arise out of the judicially created doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. But as we have held, that doctrine does not require a motion for rehearing.”

Simms v. Simms, 567 P.3d 92 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.02(A), 41-1092.03(B), 41-1092.”

Whitmer v. Hilton Casitas, 425 P.3d 253 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(A). A contempt proceeding of this nature—seeking enforcement of the parties’ legal rights or duties that were previously determined by the final decision in a prior administrative proceeding— does not fit the definition of either an appealable agency…”

City of Phoenix v. Arizona Dep't of Env't Quality, 74 P.3d 250 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “A.R.S. § 41-1092.02. Specifically, it requires that all final ADEQ actions be initially contested pursuant to the procedures established in Article 10.”

Opuroku v. Azbn (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(B) (stating ALJ shall conduct an administrative hearing under statutory procedural rules and rules made by the director of the OAH); A.”

Starr v. Az Bof (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “Although the Board is exempt from the Uniform Procedures, A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(A)(14), the Department is not.”

ruco/thaler v. Acc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “, dissenting) (listing the Commission, along with other agencies, as being exempt from the entire APA because A.R.S. § 41-1092.02 exempts the Commission from the article describing the Uniform Administrative Hearing Procedures).”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.02(A) — 2 cases

Simms v. Simms, 567 P.3d 92 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). “See A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.02(A), 41-1092.03(B), 41-1092.”

Whitmer v. Hilton Casitas, 425 P.3d 253 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(A). A contempt proceeding of this nature—seeking enforcement of the parties’ legal rights or duties that were previously determined by the final decision in a prior administrative proceeding— does not fit the definition of either an appealable agency…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.02(A)(14) — 1 case

Starr v. Az Bof (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “Although the Board is exempt from the Uniform Procedures, A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(A)(14), the Department is not.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.02(B) — 1 case

Opuroku v. Azbn (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.02(B) (stating ALJ shall conduct an administrative hearing under statutory procedural rules and rules made by the director of the OAH); A.”

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.