WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2835

STATE GOVERNMENT-TECH

104th Regular Session Introduced by Charlie Meier

Arizona bill requires mandatory settlement conferences five days after eviction notices in eviction cases for unpaid rent or material lease breaches, with strict attendance rules a

Referred to Rules Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2835

Summary — HB 2835 (Introduced Version — 2025)

Status: Introduced February 14, 2025; referred to Rules Committee.
Primary sponsor(s): Rep. Betty J. Villegas (with multiple cosponsors).
Note: The materials provided appear to include text from two different bills both labeled “HB 2835” (an Arizona landlord–tenant bill and an unrelated Illinois administrative code technical change). This summary focuses on the Arizona bill concerning the Arizona Residential Landlord and Tenant Act.

Purpose / Intent

To add mandatory, early settlement conferences into Arizona special detainer (eviction) proceedings for specified causes (material lease breaches and unpaid rent), to prescribe procedures and consequences for those conferences, and to require courts to track and report related data.

Key provisions and changes

  • Amends A.R.S. § 12-1175 (procedures for forcible entry/forcible detainer complaints):

    • Clarifies timing for issuance/ service of summons.
    • Requires mandatory settlement conferences for actions based on (a) material lease breach (A.R.S. § 33-1368(A)) or (b) failure to pay rent (A.R.S. § 33-1368(B)).
    • Conference must occur five days after the eviction notice is served.
    • Parties must bring copies of lease, past-due rent notices, receipts and other relevant documents.
    • If landlord fails to appear, the case is dismissed; if tenant fails to appear, the court enters a default judgment.
    • If not settled, an eviction hearing is set for the fifth business day after the settlement conference.
    • Elected justices of the peace shall preside over settlement conferences; if unavailable, another elected justice in the county or adjacent county may preside.
    • Courts must track all data on mandatory eviction settlement conference outcomes and report it to the Administrative Office of the Courts.

  • Amends A.R.S. § 33-1368 (tenant noncompliance/failure to pay rent):

    • Reinforces existing notice/remedy timelines for material breaches and nonpayment.
    • Adds an explicit requirement that the court schedule the mandatory settlement conference (five days after eviction notice) for special detainer actions regarding unpaid rent or material breach, and that parties provide documentation as above.
    • Restates dismissal/default consequences and the follow-up eviction hearing timeline (text truncated in version provided, but consistent with § 12-1175 changes).

  • References to § 33-1377 (special detainer proceedings) indicate related procedural sequencing; full text not included in the provided excerpt.

Who is affected

  • Tenants and landlords in Arizona involved in special detainer (eviction) cases for unpaid rent or material lease breaches.
  • Justices of the peace and court staff in justice courts (administrative and scheduling burden).
  • Attorneys and advocates representing tenants or landlords.
  • The Administrative Office of the Courts (responsible for receiving required data reports).

Procedural / timeline implications

  • Mandatory settlement conference occurs five days after eviction notice service; if unresolved, eviction hearing is set for the fifth business day following that conference — creating a defined, short timeline between notice, conference, and hearing.
  • Strict attendance consequences: landlord no-show → dismissal; tenant no-show → default judgment.
  • Courts must collect and report conference outcome data to the AOC.

Potential impacts to note

  • Could encourage early settlements and reduce some eviction hearings, but may also increase defaults when tenants miss conferences.
  • Places new scheduling, documentation and reporting duties on justice courts.
  • May impose risk for landlords who cannot appear within the mandated timeframe (case dismissal if they do not appear).
  • Short timelines may benefit expedited resolution but could reduce time for tenants to secure counsel or assistance.

Recommendation: Verify the final (later) versions for any changes, review § 33-1377 amendments in full, and confirm whether any separate or companion measures (e.g., HB 595) modify timelines or remedies.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.