Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-325

Interstate agreements and cooperation; joint and reciprocal actions with other states

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

44-325. Interstate agreements and cooperation; joint and reciprocal actions with other states

A. The department may enter into an agreement with another state to exchange information relating to abandoned property or the possible existence of abandoned property. The agreement may allow the other state or another person acting on behalf of a state to examine records as authorized in section 44-322. The department by rule may require the reporting of information that is necessary to comply with an agreement made pursuant to this section, and the department may prescribe the form.

B. The department may join with another state to seek enforcement of this chapter against any person who is or may be holding property that is reportable pursuant to this chapter.

C. At the request of another state, the attorney general of this state may maintain an action on behalf of the other state to enforce in this state the unclaimed property laws of the other state against a holder of property that is subject to escheat or a claim of abandonment by the other state, if the other state agrees to pay all costs incurred by the attorney general in maintaining the action.

D. The department may request that the attorney general of another state or another attorney begin an action in the other state on behalf of the department. The department shall pay all costs, including attorney fees, in maintaining an action pursuant to this subsection. The department may pay the costs and attorney fees from monies received pursuant to this chapter. The department may agree to pay costs and attorney fees that are based in whole or in part on a percentage of the value of any property that the department recovers in the action. The department shall not deduct any costs or attorney fees paid pursuant to this section from the amount that is subject to the claim by the owner pursuant to this chapter.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1956–1973 · leading case: Taylor v. Security National Bank

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Taylor v. Security National Bank (1973) arizctapp · cites it 4× “They then claim that under A.R.S. § 44-325 2 they are entitled to recover damages of 25% of their down payment for this failure.”

Kahl v. Winfrey (1956) ariz · cites it 2× “1939 [A.R.S. § 44-325], i. e., one-fourth of the amount paid on the harvester — which defendant computes to be the sum of $224.”

Smith v. Superior Equipment Co. (1967) ariz · cites it 4× “Therefore, we are brought to the clear mandate of the statute that “the buyer shall be discharged of all obligation.”

Neil B. McGinnis Equipment Co. v. Henson (1965) arizctapp “24 of the purchase price and relying upon § 44-325 they sought judgment on their counterclaim for 25% thereof that is to say, the sum of $6,743.”

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.