Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 48
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 48-2901 (2026)

District as municipal corporation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

All irrigation districts organized under the laws of this state are declared to be municipal corporations for all purposes. Under the laws of this state affecting or relating to irrigation districts such irrigation districts shall be deemed municipal corporations in the construction and application thereof.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: Hohokam Irrigation & Drainage Dist. v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 64 P.3d 836 (Ariz. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hohokam Irrigation & Drainage Dist. v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 64 P.3d 836 (Ariz. 2003). · cites it 8× “A.R.S. §§ 48-2901 to -3256 (Supp.2002). The legislature first defined irrigation districts as “municipal corporations for all purposes.”
Hancock v. Bisnar, 132 P.3d 283 (Ariz. 2006). · cites it 3× “See also A.R.S. § 48-2901 (providing that the district — not its divisions — is a municipal corporation).”
Adams v. Comm'n on Appellate Court Appointments, 254 P.3d 367 (Ariz. 2011). · cites it 2× “” See also A.R.S. § 48-2901 (“All irrigation districts organized under the laws of this state are declared to be municipal corporations for all purposes.”
Adams v. Com'n on Appellate Ct. Appointments, 254 P.3d 367 (Ariz. 2011). · cites it 2× “" See also A.R.S. § 48-2901 ("All irrigation districts organized under the laws of this state are declared to be municipal corporations for all purposes.”
Maricopa Cnty. v. Maricopa Cnty. Mun. Water Conservation Dist. No. 1, 830 P.2d 846 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “00 fee are valid, we need not decide the other numerous issues raised in the parties’ briefs and the amici curiae’s brief regarding water rights and the public trust doctrine. 4 Additionally, we find the arguments addressing the affirmative defenses and standing to be without…”
Maricopa-Stanfield Irrigation & Drainage Dist. v. Robertson, 123 P.3d 1122 (Ariz. 2005). “”) §§ 48-2901, -2922, -2978 (2005). Irrigation districts are specifically authorized to enter into contracts with the United States for the delivery, distribution, or apportionment of water for the lands of the district.”
Hohokam Irrigation & Drainage Dist. v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 35 P.3d 117 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. §§ 48-2901 through 48-3256. An irrigation district is created when a majority of landowners in an area “propose the organization of an irrigation district under the provisions of [A.”
Porterfield v. Van Boening, 744 P.2d 468 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “J. 377. In Arizona, drainage districts were first provided for by statute in 1912, and eventually irrigation districts were authorized in 1915.”
Flowing Wells Irrigation Dist. v. City of Tucson, 863 P.2d 915 (Ariz. T.C. 1993). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 48-2901. In addition to supplying irrigation service to customers within its boundaries, the District sells water to customers in the City of Tucson who also are within the District’s boundaries.”
Roosevelt Irrigation Dist. v. Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist., 39 F. Supp. 3d 1051 (D. Ariz. 2014). · cites it 2× “For example, RID cites Article XIII, § 5 of the Arizona Constitution which grants to municipal corporations the right to engage in business or enterprise, and also cites to A.R.S. § 48-2901, which provides that irrigation districts are municipal corporations for all purposes.”
San Carlos Irrigation & Drainage Dist. v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 786 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “Plaintiff is organized under the laws of, Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 48-3256 (2008), and is a political subdivision of Arizona, Ariz.”
Chandler v. Roosevelt (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “13 § 7; A.R.S. § 48-2901 et seq. The Water District’s primary purpose is to deliver irrigation water to land within a designated area; some of that land is in Chandler.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.