Miller v. Superior Court
In Miller v. Superior Court, 8 Ariz. App. 420, 446 P.2d 699 (1968), the real property owner subdivided the land, hired a licensed contractor to construct condominiums, and sold the units to the public. Id. at 421, 446 P.2d at 700.
Division Two of this court ruled that the owner fit the definition of a "contractor" because "he was the one undertaking to build the condominium villa." Id. at 422, 446 P.2d at 701.
The court then turned to A.R.S. 32-1121 and found that none of the provisions applied. Id. at 423, 446 P.2d at 702.
Accordingly, the definitional statute was the first step in the contractor analysis.
If the person qualified as a contractor, the court must consider if an exemption applied.
If the person did not qualify--or the parties stipulated that no exemption applied--the court will not analyze A.R.S. 32-1121.