Lease without wife's signature

A lawyer friend mentioned that a commercial lease in Arizona requires a signature from both the husband and wife (lessee). Is there any merit to this? Basically, we need to expand and the landlord will not let us out of the last year on the lease. I found a statute that states that commercial property leases require signatures from both parties due to this being a common law state, but am not sure it applies?

What statute? I'm not an Arizona lawyer, but I would be very surprised if you as a lessee were not bound by the contract just because your wife didn't sign. (Say you didn't disclose to the lessor that you were married - would the contract be void? I doubt it. That would put lessors in a very precarious position.) Your wife's not bound because she's not a party to the contract, but you are.

Sorry I have been researching this a while and I did not mean I found a statute, I meant that in reading a book on tenant rights, it states that because this is a common law state, that commercial leases must be signed by all interested parties. I think what I was reading relates more to a lessor who owns commercial property, and as an owner the wife is entitled to be included in any transaction involving common property. Of course this would not apply in my case, but the book was about tenant rights so I guess it confused me. Thanks though!