Here’s what we cover:


Arizona’s health care provider lien laws were updated in 2022. A.R.S. § 33-931 establishes certain procedures for health care providers to place a lien on third-party judgment, settlement or award for medical services rendered by a hospital or health care institution. It also provides for limitations on a health care providers ability to assert a lien on certain forms of recovery an injured person may receive. A.R.S. § 33-937 is an addition to the statutory lien scheme. It imposes a requirement that all interested parties compromise any lien or assignment granted pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-931.

A.R.S. § 33-931

A.R.S. 33-931 provides that a health care provider is entitled to a lien on personal injury recovery for the value of its services. A health care provider may assert its lien against all claims of liability or indemnity except health insurance, medical payments coverage, underinsured motorist coverage, and uninsured motorist coverage. A lien pursuant to this section extends to all claims of liability or indemnity, except that one-third of any third party judgment, settlement or award is exempt from any assignment authorized by this section. Notably, this section also provides that “one-third of any third-party judgment, settlement or award is exempt from any lien or assignment authorized by this section.” A.R.S. § 33-931(E)(1). This exclusion comes with exceptions. For example, if the injured person and the health care provider have a written and signed document stating that they elect not to use any coverage potentially available under a health insurance or similar medical benefit plan that covers the injured as an insured or dependent, then the one-third exclusion may not apply. See A.R.S. § 33-931(E)(3)(d).

A.R.S. § 33-937

A.R.S. § 33-937 is a new addition to the health care provide lien laws. It provides that any compromise of a lien must be “fair and equitable to all parties,” and gives a list of eleven factors that a health care provider “shall” consider when determining to what extent it should compromise. The list includes several standard items such as the nature of the patient’s illness, the provider’s customary charges, and total amount awarded by way of judgment or settlement agreement; however, it also includes a catch-all for “any other factor relevant to a fair and equitable settlement under the circumstances.” This provision provides welcomed flexibility in terms of what can be considered when compromising liens on health care providers’ services to injured persons.

Disclaimer: Laws change constantly. Specific legal advice should be obtained regarding any legal matter. The information contained on this website does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is created. 

Have any questions about this topic?
We’re ready to listen.

The above article is an excerpt from Arizona Laws 101: A Handbook for Non-Lawyers, 2nd Edition (Fenestra Books, 2012), by Donald A. Loose, republished with the author’s permission. 

Related Content

What Happens when a Child is Injured by Another’s Acts?

If a child has a guardian, the guardian may sue or defend in court on behalf of the child. If a child does not have a guardian or other fiduciary, the child may sue by a next friend or a guardian ad litem.

Insurance Company Bad Faith and how to Recover Damages

When an insurance company fails to act in good faith and deal fairly with its customers, it is guilty of bad faith.

Premises Liability – Can Property Owners Be Held Liable for Injuries?

This article deals with the liability of a property owner for injuries occurring on his property.

Dangerous Product Lawsuits and Recourse for Defects

The manufacturer or seller of a defective and unreasonably dangerous prod­uct is liable to anyone who is injured by the proper use of the product.

Explore All Articles by Practice Area:
Michael Ruppert
Latest posts by Michael Ruppert (see all)