44-317. Filing claim with department
A. Any person, excluding another state, who claims property that was paid or delivered to the department may file a claim on a form prescribed by the department and verified by the claimant.
B. Within ninety days after a claim is filed the department shall allow or deny the claim and shall give written notice of the decision to the claimant. If the claim is denied the department shall inform the claimant of the reasons for the denial and shall specify what additional evidence is required before the claim will be allowed. The claimant may then file a new claim with the department or may maintain an action pursuant to section 44-318.
C. Within thirty days after a claim is allowed the department shall deliver the property or pay the net proceeds of a sale of the property to the claimant, including any dividend, interest or other increment to which the claimant is entitled pursuant to sections 44-311 and 44-312.
D. A holder who pays the owner for property that has been delivered to the department and that if claimed from the department by the owner would be subject to an increment pursuant to sections 44-311 and 44-312 shall recover from the department the amount of the increment.
E. Notwithstanding any other maximum time period that is specified in a statute, contract or court order to commence or enforce an action to obtain payment of a claim for monies or recovery of property, a person may file a claim under subsection A of this section within thirty-five years after the final day of the fiscal year in which the department receives the unclaimed property.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1954–2025 · leading case:
Taylor v. Sec. Nat'l Bank, 514 P.2d 257 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973).
Taylor v. Sec. Nat'l Bank, 514 P.2d 257 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 5× “However, this statute applies only in the absence of any notice under A.R.S. § 44-317. 3 The latter section *507 provided for an optional notice to the buyer that the seller intends to retake the goods.”
Alabama v. Bowsher, 734 F. Supp. 525 (D.D.C. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Code § 35-12-31 (1977); Ariz.Rev. Stat.Ann. § 44-317 (1987); 12 Del.”
State v. Polan, 278 P.2d 432 (Ariz. 1954).
“The first goes to the failure of the court reporter to file the transcript of the preliminary examination within ten days after the close of the examination, as required in Chapter 67, Section 2, Laws 1953, now appearing as Section 44-317, A.C.A. 1939, 1954 Supplement.”
Garza v. Woods, No. 2:22-cv-01310, 2023 WL 5608414 (D. Ariz. Aug. 30, 2023).
· cites it 3× “) Plaintiffs allege individuals can make claims with the State for unclaimed 21 property for a period of 35 years under A.R.S. § 44-317(E). (FAC ¶ 31 (citing A.R.”
Watts v. Woods, No. 2:25-cv-00819 (D. Ariz. Oct. 8, 2025).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 44-317(A). 14 Plaintiff asserts that the State “does not pay just compensation to the owners of the 15 property for its use of the property while in the State’s custody.”
Albert v. Franchot, No. 1:22-cv-01558 (D. Md. Jan. 26, 2024).
“” A.R.S. § 44-317(E). Under the Arizona statute, an individual’s interest in unclaimed property in the State’s custody automatically lapses after thirty-five years; at that moment, the property is considered abandoned as contemplated by Texaco.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-317(A): 1 case
Watts v. Woods, No. 2:25-cv-00819 (D. Ariz. Oct. 8, 2025).
“A.R.S. § 44-317(A). 14 Plaintiff asserts that the State “does not pay just compensation to the owners of the 15 property for its use of the property while in the State’s custody.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-317(E): 2 cases
Garza v. Woods, No. 2:22-cv-01310, 2023 WL 5608414 (D. Ariz. Aug. 30, 2023).
“) Plaintiffs allege individuals can make claims with the State for unclaimed 21 property for a period of 35 years under A.R.S. § 44-317(E). (FAC ¶ 31 (citing A.R.”
Albert v. Franchot, No. 1:22-cv-01558 (D. Md. Jan. 26, 2024).
“” A.R.S. § 44-317(E). Under the Arizona statute, an individual’s interest in unclaimed property in the State’s custody automatically lapses after thirty-five years; at that moment, the property is considered abandoned as contemplated by Texaco.”
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.