Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 9
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-462 (2026)

Definitions; general provisions concerning evidence

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

A. In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. "Board of adjustment" means the official body designated by local ordinance to hear and decide applications for variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance and appeals from the decision of the zoning administrator.

2. "Municipal" or "municipality" means an incorporated city or town.

3. "Planning agency" means the official body designated by local ordinance to carry out the purposes of this article and may be a planning department, a planning commission, a hearing officer, the legislative body itself or any combination thereof.

4. "Zoning administrator" means the official responsible for enforcement of the zoning ordinance.

5. "Zoning ordinance" means a municipal ordinance regulating the use of the land or structures, or both, as provided in this article.

B. Formal rules of evidence or procedure which must be followed in court shall not be applied in zoning matters, except to the extent that a municipality may provide therefor.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1965–2021 · leading case: Arizona Found. for Neurology & Psychiatry v. Sienerth, 477 P.2d 758 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Arizona Found. for Neurology & Psychiatry v. Sienerth, 477 P.2d 758 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 8× “They assert that A.R.S. § 9-462, subsec. B should be interpreted so as not to require the hospital to obtain a use permit prior to expanding its physical plant.”
Aegis of Arizona, L.L.C. v. Town of Marana, 81 P.3d 1016 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “01(A)(3), A.R.S., further states that only the city’s “legislative body” may “[rjegulate .”
Gannett Outdoor Co. v. City of Mesa, 768 P.2d 191 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “See A.R.S. §§ 9-462 to -462.07 (1977). See generally 1 R.”
Circle K Corp. v. City of Mesa, 803 P.2d 457 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “After its motion for a new trial was denied, Circle K brought this appeal, and raises two issues: 1) Whether the Mesa ordinance violates A.R.S. § 9-462.02; and 2) If not, whether requiring removal or modification of the nonconforming sign as a condition to granting the new sign…”
Book Cellar, Inc. v. City of Phoenix, 678 P.2d 517 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “Allowance of the writ shall not stay proceedings upon the decision appealed from, but the court may, on application, on notice to the board and for good cause shown, grant a restraining order, and on final hearing may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the…”
Emmett McLoughlin Realty, Inc. v. Pima Cnty., 58 P.3d 39 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Our courts, however, have condoned the legislature’s delegation of certain of its powers under appropriate circumstances.”
Comm. for Neighborhood Pres. v. Graham, 484 P.2d 226 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 7× “§§ 9-462 and 9-463 prior to enactment of a zoning ordinance: (a) Its zoning commission must make a preliminary report recommending both the boundaries of and the regulations to be enforced in various original districts. (b) Its zoning commission must hold public hearings on the…”
Corrigan v. City of Scottsdale, 720 P.2d 528 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Shortly before final argument, and after both sides rested, Corrigan filed a pleading entitled “Notice of Plaintiff’s Basis for Argument.”
Bartolomeo v. Town of Paradise Valley, 631 P.2d 564 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “Rather, A.R.S. §§ 9-462 —9-462.07 are applicable.”
Manning v. Reilly, 408 P.2d 414 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1965). · cites it 2× “§§ 9-462 and 9-463 prior to enactment of a zoning ordinance: (a) Its zoning commission must make a preliminary report recommending both the boundaries of and the regulations to be enforced in various original districts. (b) Its zoning commission must hold public hearings on the…”
Stagecoach Trails MHC, L.L.C. v. City of Benson, 278 P.3d 314 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “AR.S. § 9-462(A)(l), (4). Specifically, AR.”
Folsom Investments, Inc. v. City of Scottsdale, 620 F. Supp. 1372 (D. Ariz. 1985). · cites it 2× “Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 9-462 et seq. applies to municipal zoning.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-462(A)(1) — 2 cases
Aegis of Arizona, L.L.C. v. Town of Marana, 81 P.3d 1016 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “01(A)(3), A.R.S., further states that only the city’s “legislative body” may “[rjegulate .”
The Town of Marana v. Aegis of Arizona, LLC. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-462(A)(4) — 2 cases
Aegis of Arizona, L.L.C. v. Town of Marana, 81 P.3d 1016 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). “01(A)(3), A.R.S., further states that only the city’s “legislative body” may “[rjegulate .”
The Town of Marana v. Aegis of Arizona, LLC. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-462(A)(5) — 2 cases
Whiteco Outdoor Advert. v. City of Tucson, 972 P.2d 647 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998).
Novak v. Fountain Hills (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-462(A)(l) — 1 case
Stagecoach Trails MHC, L.L.C. v. City of Benson, 278 P.3d 314 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “AR.S. § 9-462(A)(l), (4). Specifically, AR.”
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.