A. It is a fraudulent practice and unlawful for a person, in connection with a transaction or transactions within or from this state involving the provision of investment advisory services, directly or indirectly, to do any of the following:
1. Employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud.
2. Make any untrue statement of material fact, or fail to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statement made, in the light of the circumstances under which it was made, not misleading.
3. Misrepresent any professional qualifications with the intent that the client rely on the misrepresentation.
4. Engage in any transaction, practice or course of business that operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit.
B. A person who violates this section is liable to any person for all losses incurred by that person as a result of the violation, together with interest on losses incurred, court costs and reasonable attorney fees. A civil action under this section is barred unless it is brought within three years after the violation or within two years after discovery of the facts constituting the violation, whichever occurs first.
C. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 4 felony.
Notes of Decisions
Facciola v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 781 F. Supp. 2d 913 (D. Ariz. 2011).
· cites it 4× “The complaint also includes claims for: 5) Negligent Misrepresentation and Nondisclosure; 6) Primary Statutory Liability Under A.R.S. § 44-3241; 7) Aiding and Abetting Violations of A.”
Strickland v. Calton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 6× “§ 44-2003(A), 2 investment-advisory fraud under A.R.S. § 44-3241, respondeat superior and constructive fraud.”
Collins v. Glick (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “§ 44-1991 (fraud in the purchase or sale of securities)1 and § 44-3241 (fraud in the provision of investment advisory services).”
Facciola Ex Rel. Mortgages Ltd. Inv. Class v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, 593 F. App'x 723 (9th Cir. 2015).
“Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 44-3241, 44-3101(5). Appellants’ negligent misrepresentation claim fails because the allegations in the Original Complaint are insufficient to demonstrate, in accordance with Arizona’s adoption of the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 (1979), Standard…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-3241(B) — 2 cases
Strickland v. Calton (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“§ 44-2003(A), 2 investment-advisory fraud under A.R.S. § 44-3241, respondeat superior and constructive fraud.”
Collins v. Glick (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
“§ 44-1991 (fraud in the purchase or sale of securities)1 and § 44-3241 (fraud in the provision of investment advisory services).”
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.