State of Arizona v. Az Board of Regents

Summary

The court held that the Attorney General could not pursue the tax-enforcement claim because the property was constitutionally exempt and there was no applicable tax to enforce. It held that the Attorney General may use quo warranto to challenge an unlawful exercise of a public franchise, but that only the claim alleging an ultra vires lease survived dismissal. The court also held that a public-monies claim brought by the Attorney General is subject to a five-year limitations period and that the claim related back to the original complaint because both arose from the same transaction.