Arizona § 3-112 Agricultural operations; nuisance liability: damages; state preemption

Arizona Statutes

§ 3-112 — Agricultural operations; nuisance liability: damages; state preemption

Arizona § 3-112

Title 3Arizona Revised Statutes

Ch. 1AGRICULTURAL ADMINISTRATION

Art. 2Agricultural Protection Act

This text of Arizona § 3-112 (Agricultural operations; nuisance liability: damages; state preemption) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 3-112 (2026).

Text

A.Agricultural operations conducted on farmland that are consistent with good agricultural practices and established before surrounding nonagricultural uses are presumed to be reasonable and do not constitute a nuisance unless the agricultural operation has a substantial adverse effect on the public health and safety.

B.Agricultural operations undertaken in conformity with federal, state and local laws and regulations are presumed to be good agricultural practices and not adversely affecting the public health and safety.

C.In a nuisance action against an agricultural operation conducted on farmland:

1.The court may award costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, to the prevailing party.

2.If the court determines that a party filed a nuisance action under one of the f

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

A. Agricultural operations conducted on farmland that are consistent with good agricultural practices and established before surrounding nonagricultural uses are presumed to be reasonable and do not constitute a nuisance unless the agricultural operation has a substantial adverse effect on the public health and safety.

B. Agricultural operations undertaken in conformity with federal, state and local laws and regulations are presumed to be good agricultural practices and not adversely affecting the public health and safety.

C. In a nuisance action against an agricultural operation conducted on farmland:

1. The court may award costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, to the prevailing party.

2. If the court determines that a party filed a nuisance action under one of the following circumstances, the court shall award reasonable costs and attorney fees to the other party:

(a) The action was not filed in good faith.

(b) The action was not grounded in fact or based on law.

(c) The action was filed for an improper purpose, such as to harass the other party, to cause an unnecessary delay or to increase the cost of litigation to the other party.

3. The court may not award punitive damages for a nuisance action unless the alleged nuisance emanated from an agricultural operation that has been subject to a criminal conviction or a civil enforcement action taken by a state or federal environmental or health regulatory agency pursuant to a notice of violation for the conduct alleged to be the source of the nuisance.

D. For the purposes of this section, costs and expenses may include attorney fees, deposition costs and other reasonable expenses as the court finds necessary to the full and proper presentation of the action, including any appeal.

E. A city, town, county, special taxing district or other political subdivision of this state may not declare an agricultural operation conducted on farmland to be a nuisance if the agricultural operation's practices are lawful, customary, reasonable, safe and necessary to the agriculture industry as the practices pertain to an agricultural operation's practices as determined by the agricultural best management practices committee established by section 49-457, the Arizona department of agriculture or the department of environmental quality.