Cited by

§ 33-420(A), which occurs when there is no arguable basis that the underlying action affects title to real property or is not supported by credible evidence, Evergreen W.

A lis pendens is groundless if the recording party’s claim “that the underlying action is one affecting title to real property has no arguable basis or is not supported by any credible evidence.” Evergreen West

See Evergreen West, –19 (App. 1991) (“The need for [a lis pendens] is evident in an action for specific performance”).

¶16 A lis pendens is groundless where “the claim that the underlying action is one affecting title to real property has no arguable basis or is not supported by any credible evidence.” Evergreen W.

¶ 22 (App. 2014) (citing Evergreen W., (“A 4 WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS Decision of the Court claim .

(quoting Evergreen W., ).

(quoting Evergreen W., ).

A claim is groundless “if the proponent can present no rational argument based on the evidence of law in support of that claim.” Rogone, 236 Ariz. at 50 ¶ 22 (quoting Evergreen W., ).

¶15 In determining whether lis pendens were wrongfully recorded, the court is limited to considering “whether the action is one affecting title to real property.” Santa Fe Ridge Homeowners’ Ass’n v. Bartschi, ¶ 11 (App. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Evergreen W., (“Section 33– 420 applies to the wrongful filing of a lis pendens.”).

See Schweiger v. China Doll Rest., Inc., Evergreen W., (holding that determination whether a lis pendens is groundless “should not involve a decision on the merits of the underlying actions”).

“While this determination may require the trial court to look beyond the pleadings, it should not involve a decision on the merits of the underlying action.” Evergreen West

A lis pendens is groundless when the claim to title “has no arguable basis or is not supported by any credible evidence.” Evergreen W.

has no arguable basis or is not supported by any credible evidence.” SWC Baseline & Crismon Inv’rs, L.L.C. v. Augusta Ranch Ltd. P’ship, ¶ 31 (App. 2011) citing Evergreen W.

See Evergreen W., (internal quotation and citation omitted) (noting that a claim is frivolous “if [the] proponent can present no rational argument based upon the evidence or law in support of that claim”).

“Groundless” and “frivolous” are equivalent terms, and a claim is frivolous “if the proponent can present no rational argument based upon the evidence or law in support of that claim.” Evergreen W.

See, e.g., Wyatt, 167 Ariz. at 286 , 806 P.2d at 875 (stating that the purpose of the statute is achieved by “deterring individuals from knowingly filing groundless lis pen-dens claims”); Evergreen W., , (stating that “the purpose of AR.S.

has no arguable basis or is not supported by any credible evidence.” Evergreen West

In determining whether a lis pen-dens was wrongfully recorded, the court is limited to considering “whether the ‘action is one affecting title to real property.’ ” Evergreen W., , (citation omitted).

¶ 23 Sellers correctly maintain that the appropriate test to determine a groundless lis pendens, as enunciated in Evergreen W., , is whether the underlying action *641 affecting title to the property has no arguable basis.

See Evergreen West, , (holding that a developer’s complaint “seeking specific performance of [an] option agreement is clearly an action affecting title to real property”).

In Evergreen West, , Division Two of this court recently held that a plaintiff is not prohibited from recording a lis pendens merely because he may lose on the merits of his action.