In January of this year, in BMO Harris Bank v. Wildwood Creek Ranch, LLC, Division One of the Court of Appeals ruled that Arizona’s anti-deficiency law does not apply to vacant land, even if the owner intends to build a dwelling on the land which would otherwise qualify for the protection of the anti-deficiency statute.  In its ruling, the Court distinguished its prior ruling in M & I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Mueller from 2011, where the Court of Appeals had ruled that the anti-deficiency statute did apply to a dwelling under construction, where the trustee’s sale occurred after construction had been abandoned.  In Mueller, the Court found that the intent of Mueller to occupy the dwelling upon completion brought the transaction within the ambit of the anti-deficiency statute, but because no construction had begun in the new case, the protection of the anti-deficiency statute was not available.

Whether you or a client can qualify for the protection of Arizona’s anti-deficiency statute is a fact-intensive question which is best answered after a consultation with an attorney well versed in real property law.