A. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the director is entitled to judicial review of the decision pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6.
B. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the appeals board may file an application for appeal to the court of appeals with the clerk of the appeals board within thirty days after the date of mailing or electronic transmission of the decision, except as provided in subsection C of this section. On the filing of an application for appeal, the clerk of the appeals board shall transmit to the court of appeals the application for appeal, the decisions issued by the appeals board and all petitions for review and responses of the appeals board. The clerk of the appeals board shall also transmit any portions of the record before the department requested by the court of appeals. The court of appeals shall thereafter grant or deny the application for appeal. If the application is denied, the decision of the appeals board shall be deemed final, and further appeal may not be taken. If the application is granted, the rules for appeals in civil actions shall apply, commencing with the preparation and transmittal of the complete record before the department and a record index. A bond for costs on appeal or docket fee is not required. The department and all parties before the appeals board shall be given notice of the appeal and an opportunity to appear. All appeals are limited to the record before the department unless the court orders otherwise. An issue may not be raised on appeal that has not been raised in the petition for review before the appeals board. The department shall provide the record for use by the court and by any parties who request copies. The cost of providing the record is a taxable cost if the department prevails. The court of appeals may designate one department of division one to hear all appeals under this section.
C. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the appeals board concerning tax liability, collection or enforcement may appeal to the tax court, as defined in section 12-161, within thirty days after the date of mailing or electronic transmission of the decision. The appellant need not pay any of the tax, penalty or interest upheld by the appeals board in its decision before initiating, or in order to maintain an appeal to the tax court pursuant to this section.
D. Any appeal that is taken to tax court pursuant to this section is subject to the following provisions:
1. No injunction, writ of mandamus or other legal or equitable process may issue in an action in any court in this state against an officer of this state to prevent or enjoin the collection of any tax, penalty or interest.
2. The action shall not begin more than thirty days after the date of mailing or electronic transmission of the appeals board's decision. Failure to bring the action within thirty days after the date of mailing or electronic transmission of the appeals board's decision constitutes a waiver of the protest and a waiver of all claims against this state arising from or based on the illegality of the tax, penalties and interest at issue.
3. The scope of review of an appeal to tax court pursuant to this section shall be governed by section 12-910, applying section 23-613.01 as that section reads on the date the appeal is filed to the tax court or as thereafter amended. Either party to the action may appeal to the court of appeals or supreme court as provided by law.
Notes of Decisions
Weller v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 860 P.2d 487 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “We granted Weller's application for appeal to this court pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993. *223 Although Weller makes several arguments on appeal, the central question is this: Is Blue Circle's rule that a positive test for any level of cannabinoid metabolites in urine alone…”
Prebula v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 672 P.2d 978 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 4× “3 Appellant’s subsequent request for review was denied and he timely filed an application for appeal to this court pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993. As to appellant’s contention that the appeals board was not justified in making supplemental findings and corrections, we find…”
Korens v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 631 P.2d 581 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 9× “Appellant brought this appeal pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993 in order to challenge a decision of the unemployment insurance appeals board of the Arizona Department of Economic Security.”
Munguia v. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 765 P.2d 559 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 4× “The employer is statutorily prohibited from raising this issue for the first time on appeal, see A.R.S. § 41-1993, so we need not address it.”
Marlar v. State, 666 P.2d 504 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 41-1993 (Supp.1982). The Administrative Review Act expressly provides that a plaintiff filing an action pursuant to its provisions shall name the “agency” as a defendant.”
Wallis v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 617 P.2d 534 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 4× “The final decision of the appeals board is subject to direct appeal to this court within 30 days pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993. With this procedural background and its various time limitations in mind, we turn to the facts of this case.”
Henricks v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 270 P.3d 874 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “*49 ¶ 8 Henrieks petitioned for review of the ALJ’s decision, which the Appeals Board affirmed. On her request for further review, the Board again affirmed the decision of the ALJ.”
Thielking v. Kirschner, 859 P.2d 777 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 2× “Alternatively, it might have specified that time be counted from the date of mailing.”
Lane v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 780 P.2d 414 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 8× “§ 23-672(F) does set forth the required contents of a request for review before the Board and does provide the prerequisites for further appeal, the jurisdiction of this court to hear appeals from the Board is governed by A.R.S. § 41-1993, which provides in part: B.”
Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Magma Copper Co., 607 P.2d 6 (Ariz. 1980).
· cites it 2× “Magma then took an appeal to the Superior Court from the Appeals Tribunal pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993. 3 The appeal was based on the record developed before the agency.”
Thompson v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 619 P.2d 1070 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 2× “Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal to this Court pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1993. The unemployment insurance appeals board is empowered to take additional evidence in a case appealed to it from the appeal tribunal, or may affirm, reverse, modify or set aside the decision of…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1993(B) — 29 cases
Henricks v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 270 P.3d 874 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
“*49 ¶ 8 Henrieks petitioned for review of the ALJ’s decision, which the Appeals Board affirmed. On her request for further review, the Board again affirmed the decision of the ALJ.”
Thielking v. Kirschner, 859 P.2d 777 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
“Alternatively, it might have specified that time be counted from the date of mailing.”
Lane v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 780 P.2d 414 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
“§ 23-672(F) does set forth the required contents of a request for review before the Board and does provide the prerequisites for further appeal, the jurisdiction of this court to hear appeals from the Board is governed by A.R.S. § 41-1993, which provides in part: B.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1993(C) — 1 case
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.