Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2017-052655: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc.

Case Number

CV2017-052655

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

Not captured

Case Type

Not captured

Judge

Not captured

Location

Not captured

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/06/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/03/2025

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
C. Curley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

ORDER DENYING RULE 60 MOTION AND OTHER MATTERS FILED

This Court has considered several filings by Plaintiff Nancy Berent on December 10,
2024. First, it is unclear whether all the subject motions were actually served on all the named
defendants as the certificates of service do not indicate service on all parties. Further, this matter
was affirmed on appeal and the appellate mandate has now issued. The appellate mandate must
be followed as law of the case and Plaintiff’s motion does not otherwise establish grounds for
relief under Rule 60. The motion refers to alleged criminal conduct, the responsibility of insurers,
and confuses what it means to seek a venue change. The motions are difficult to follow and refer
to matters that were never at issue in this case.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s filings as follows:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/03/2025

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

 Request For Summary Judgement [sic] or Send Case to the Grant Jury for
Indictments County DA, filed December 10, 2024
 Request Change of Venue from Northeast Court/Reinstate my Breach of Contract
Lawsuit for Injunctive Relief, filed December 10, 2024, and
 Motion to Reinstate my Breach of Contract Lawsuit and Request New Venue Due
to New Information from Builder, filed December 10, 2024.

Dated this 3rd day of January, 2025.

________________________________
Honorable Melissa Iyer Julian
Maricopa County Superior Court

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/19/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/17/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

RULE 54(C) ORDER

Judgment in this matter was entered pursuant to Rule 54(C) on July 26, 2022. Thereafter,
Plaintiffs Nancy and Michael Berent filed 30 different documents, none of which appear to have
been properly served and which do not set forth grounds for relief under Arizona law or the Rules
of Civil Procedure. The Court of Appeals issued an order staying the pending appeal for entry of
a final judgment. This is that order. Any further remedy or error claimed in connection with this
order or the previously entered judgment shall be directed to the appellate court for review.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/17/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

The following documents filed since entry of the judgment are denied and, as set forth below,
this is a final order entered pursuant to Rule 54(c):

1. Appeal from Arbitration and Motion for Trial Setting, filed August
5, 2022, by Michael Berent III;
2. Request for New trial due to judicial interference Motion to Set
Aside Arbitration award due to judicial interference by defendants,
filed August 5, 2022, by Michael Berent III;
3. Disclosing My Mothers Legal Fees Due to Defendants Denying
My Mother a Unforeseen Medically Necessary Contin., filed
August 9, 2022, by Michael Berent III;
4. Consolidated on going felony in progress, filed August 9, 2022, by
Michael Berent III;
5. Document entitled “Felony in Progress,” filed August 11, 2022, by
Michael Berent III;
6. ARS 13-28-10 Intentional Interference in Judicial Proceedings is
Not Appeal Issue of Any Higher Court due to Fraud, filed August
17, 2022, by “N Berent”
7. Appeal from Arbitration and Motion for Trial Setting, filed August
19, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
8. Notice of Nonopposition for New Trial Request for Declaratory
Judgment, filed September 8, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
9. Notice of Criminal Investigation MCSO, etc, filed September 12,
2022, by Nancy Berent;
10. Motion to Serve by Alternative Service, filed September 14, 2022,
by Nancy Berent;
11. Motion to Compel Opposing Parties to Produce Written
Agreement, filed September 21, 2022
12. Various Summons, filed September 23, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
13. Prepared Documents for Show Cause, filed September 22, 2022;
by Nancy Berent;
14. Emergency Mandatory Permanent Injunction, filed October 19,
2022, by Nancy Berent;
15. Reconsideration for Medical continuance, filed October 31, 2022,
by Nancy Berent;
16. Ken Fields Retired Judge Contempt, filed October 31, 2022, by
Nancy Berent;
17. Motion to Compel Ken Fields to response and produce written
stipulation, filed November 2, 2022, by Nancy Berent;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/17/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

18. Emergency Order Rejected, filed November 7, 2022, by Nancy
Berent;
19. Request the Clerk of the Court Send Case to Judge Assigned, filed
November 7, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
20. Request Extension of Time for Appeal Rule 60b rule 59
peremptory challenge, filed November 9, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
21. December 23, 2021, Per Rule 73f arbitrator was disqualified, etc,
filed November 10, 2022 by Nancy Berent;
22. Rule 8.4 Debra Brockway, etc, filed November 14, 2022, by Nancy
Berent;
23. Unintelligible Praecipe, filed November 28, 2022, by Nancy
Berent;
24. Two Applications and Affidavits for Default, filed November 29,
2022;
25. Bench Warrant Demand, etc, filed December 19, 2022, by Nancy
Berent;
26. Motion to Continue/Motion to Strike any orders or judgments, filed
December 20, 2022, by Nancy Berent;
27. Unintelligible Praecipe, filed December 20, 2022, by Nancy
Berent;
28. Motion for New Trial due to Inexcusable Criminal Interference,
filed December 21, 2022;
29. Request for Relief from Judgement [sic], filed December 27, 2022,
by Nancy Berent;
30. Court to Provide Vision Management, filed December 30, 2022.

IT IS ORDERED denying any relief requested before entry of this order.

No further matters remain pending. This is a final judgment entered pursuant to Rule 54(c),
Ariz. R. Civ. P.

HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN

JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/23/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/18/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider Plaintiffs’ Motion for Bench
Trial filed January 15, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants shall file a Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for
Reconsideration no later than February 11, 2019.

**Counsel please review the information below**

Becoming familiar with the Court’s requirements is crucial, failure to comply with any of
the requirements can and will delay any resolution to the issue.

Counsel are encouraged to visit Judge Campagnolo’s online profile for information on
the Court’s expectations regarding motion practices and requirements, discovery disputes, and
hearing/trial procedures at the following website:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/18/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/JudicialBiographies/judges/profile.asp?jdgID=327&jdg
USID=12118

Pay particular attention to the following:

 The Court will reject any motion that is not accompanied by a proposed form or
order in word format.

 All motions, including, but not limited to, summary judgment motions, responses
and replies, that contain 5 or more exhibits shall require the filing party to do the
following:

 Within 24 hours of filing a motion/response/reply that contains 5 or more
exhibits, the filing party is required to provide to the Court a copy of the
respective motion, response or reply along with all exhibits on a CD.
 Each pleading on the CD shall contain hyperlinks to all exhibits attached to
your pleading and to all substantive appellate cases cited therein (you do
not need to provide hyperlinks to boilerplate case law, unless it is an unusual
or obscure citation). The hyperlink to exhibits is crucial, so that the Court
can readily locate an exhibit without undue delay.

 This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and other pleadings in this
case must be submitted individually. The parties shall not combine any motion with
a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed separately and designated as such.
No pleadings will be accepted if filed in combination with another.

 Any motion that requires a Rule 7.1(h) Certificate of Good Faith Consultation,
which does not include such Certificate, will be held until compliance is met.

 Dismissal Calendar
The Court will reject any request to place or continue a matter on the inactive
calendar. As of April 15, 2014 the civil court’s “inactive” calendar was replaced
with a “dismissal” calendar. Any request must refer to the Dismissal Calendar,
as the inactive calendar no longer exist in civil cases.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/28/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/24/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Response to Defendant Bell West
Ranch Homeowners Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Reply in Support of
Plaintiffs’ Partial Motion for Summary Judgment filed January 18, 2019.

The above stated pleading combines a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment and
a Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court’s protocol regarding motions states:

“This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and other Court
requested filings in this case must be submitted individually. The parties shall not
combine any motion with a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed
separately and designated as such. No pleadings will be accepted if filed in
combination with another.”

For the foregoing reasons,

IT IS ORDERED rejecting the above pleading.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/24/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall refile by separate pleadings, the Response to
Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Reply
in Support of Plaintiffs’ Partial Motion for Summary Judgment no later than 10 days from today’s
date.
**Counsel please review the information below**

Becoming familiar with the Court’s requirements is crucial, failure to comply with any of
the requirements can and will delay any resolution to the issue.

Counsel are encouraged to visit Judge Campagnolo’s online profile for information on
the Court’s expectations regarding motion practices and requirements, discovery disputes, and
hearing/trial procedures at the following website:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/JudicialBiographies/judges/profile.asp?jdgID=327&jdg
USID=12118

Pay particular attention to the following:

 The Court will reject any motion that is not accompanied by a proposed form or
order in word format.

 All motions, including, but not limited to, summary judgment motions, responses
and replies, that contain 5 or more exhibits shall require the filing party to do the
following:

 Within 24 hours of filing a motion/response/reply that contains 5 or more
exhibits, the filing party is required to provide to the Court a copy of the
respective motion, response or reply along with all exhibits on a CD.
 Each pleading on the CD shall contain hyperlinks to all exhibits attached to
your pleading and to all substantive appellate cases cited therein (you do
not need to provide hyperlinks to boilerplate case law, unless it is an unusual
or obscure citation). The hyperlink to exhibits is crucial, so that the Court
can readily locate an exhibit without undue delay.

 This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and other pleadings in this
case must be submitted individually. The parties shall not combine any motion with
a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed separately and designated as such.
No pleadings will be accepted if filed in combination with another.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/24/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3

 Any motion that requires a Rule 7.1(h) Certificate of Good Faith Consultation,
which does not include such Certificate, will be held until compliance is met.

 Dismissal Calendar
The Court will reject any request to place or continue a matter on the inactive
calendar. As of April 15, 2014 the civil court’s “inactive” calendar was replaced
with a “dismissal” calendar. Any request must refer to the Dismissal Calendar,
as the inactive calendar no longer exist in civil cases.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/28/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/25/2019

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure filed January 23,
2019.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference on January 31, 2019 at 10:00
a.m. (15 minutes allotted) for the purpose addressing the above motion. Counsel for Plaintiff
shall initiate the telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of all other counsel on the
conference call and by calling this division at: (602) 372-0537 no later than 5 minutes before the
scheduled time. The parties and counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences
via cell phones or speakerphone.

.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/01/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/31/2019

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 102 - NE

10:03 a.m. This is the time set for Status Conference regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion to Extend
Expert Disclosure filed January 23, 2019. Present on behalf of Plaintiffs is counsel, Kristin M.
Roebuck. Present on behalf of Defendants Grazyna Mroczkowska, Marta Mroczkowska and
Miroslaw Mroczkowska is counsel, Debra Brockway. Present on behalf of Defendant Bell West
Ranch Homeowners Association is counsel, Maria Kupillas.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

Judge Campagnolo discloses that he was previously employed as a prosecutor for the
Attorney General in the Criminal Division from January 2004 through June 2015. Judge
Campagnolo further discloses that Thomas Horne was the Attorney General during the times of
January of 2011 until the end of December 2014. This Court finds that it is not subject to

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/31/2019

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

disqualification under Rule 2.11 of the Judicial Ethics, but the Court makes the disclosure so that
any party may request that the Judge be disqualified.

IT IS ORDERED the parties’ shall file any objection to Judge Campagnolo remaining on
the case no later than 5:00 p.m. on February 7, 2019.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the Defendants want to file a responsive brief to
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure, it shall be done no later than 5:00 p.m. on
February 7, 2019.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court will defer ruling on the above motion until it
is determined that the parties have no objection to Judge Campagnolo remaining on this matter.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Court will rule on the above motion on February 8, 2019
if there are no objections filed.

10:28 a.m. Hearing concludes.

**Counsel and Unrepresented parties please review the information below**

Becoming familiar with the Court’s requirements is crucial, failure to comply with any of
the requirements can and will delay any resolution to the issue.

Counsel are encouraged to visit Judge Campagnolo’s online profile for information on
the Court’s expectations regarding motion practices and requirements, discovery disputes, and
hearing/trial procedures at the following website:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/JudicialBiographies/judges/profile.asp?jdgID=327&jdg
USID=12118

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/01/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/31/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s January 20, 2023, Counterclaim for Fraud Negligence
By Debra Brockway, Ken Fields, Kevin Arnold, Clint Goodman, and Kelsey Brophy, Plaintiff’s
January 20, 2023, Request Immediate Reimbursement for Court of Appeals Filing Fee Be Paid by
Debra Brockway Who Initiated Fraud Arbitration Hearing, Plaintiff’s January 23, 2023, Motion
to Strike & Seal Illegally Void Obtained Judgement Unconsionable [sic] Felony Committed By
Debra Brockway, Plaintiff’s January 23, 2023, Fraud Upon Court Judgment Order Is Void Mars
Index Has No Written Stipulation Filed With Clerk of Court, and Plaintiff’s January 23, 2023,
Special Action Reconsideration By Criminal Court Judge In Superior Court Emergency Request
Public Safety Violation;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

01/31/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Plaintiff’s January 20, 2023, Counterclaim for Fraud
Negligence By Debra Brockway, Ken Fields, Kevin Arnold, Clint Goodman, and Kelsey Brophy,
Plaintiff’s January 20, 2023, Request Immediate Reimbursement for Court of Appeals Filing Fee
Be Paid by Debra Brockway Who Initiated Fraud Arbitration Hearing, Plaintiff’s January 23,
2023, Motion to Strike & Seal Illegally Void Obtained Judgement Unconsionable [sic] Felony
Committed By Debra Brockway, Plaintiff’s January 23, 2023, Fraud Upon Court Judgment Order
Is Void Mars Index Has No Written Stipulation Filed With Clerk of Court, and Plaintiff’s January
23, 2023, Special Action Reconsideration By Criminal Court Judge In Superior Court Emergency
Request Public Safety Violation due to Rule 54(c) Order.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/12/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/08/2019

Docket Code 001
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO
JUDGE GATES

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Defendants’ Objection to Judicial Appointment filed February 7,
2019.

Based on the Court’s discussion and on Defendants’ above objection,

The Court recuses itself from this case. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED referring this matter to the Civil Presiding Judge for reassignment.

Docket code 001

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/13/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/12/2019

Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. PAMELA GATES
K. Ballard

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE BAILEY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Theodore Campagnolo, who has
disqualified himself. The case was transferred to the Presiding Civil Judge for reassignment.

IT IS ORDERED reassigning this case to Civil Calendar CVJ-03, the Honorable Cynthia
Bailey, for all further proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all hearings set by the disqualified judge are
vacated, to be reset by the new division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly file within 10 days of the date
of this minute entry, a notice with the new division listing any outstanding motions (including the
file dates), whether they are ripe for resolution, and any hearings that need to be reset.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/15/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/14/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Nancy Berent’s Case Management Statement Filed With Court of
Appeals With Motion to Extend Stay of Appeal – Fraud Upon Court, filed January 27, 2023,

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Nancy Berent’s Case Management Statement Filed With
Court of Appeals With Motion to Extend Stay of Appeal – Fraud Upon Court, filed January 27,
2023. Taking no action as this Court no longer has jurisdiction now that the matter has been
appealed.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/17/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/16/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

REJECTING PLEADINGS

The Court has received Nancy Berent’s Copy of Expenses for Copies and Certified Mail
Tracking Sent to Maricopa Co. Prosecutors Bench Warrant Packet, filed January 27, 2023, the
Request Court Sign Order for New Trial Rule 60 Due to Violation of Rule 73, filed January 31,
2023, Section 12-512 Opposition to an Award, filed February 3, 2023, Requesting This Court Sign
and Approved Order from September 8, 2022, filed February 3, 2023, and February 1, 2023 Clerk
Handed Me a Sticky Note to Send My Motions Going Forward to Judge Bachus, filed February 7,
2023,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/16/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Nancy Berent’s Copy of Expenses for Copies and Certified
Mail Tracking Sent to Maricopa Co. Prosecutors Bench Warrant Packet, filed January 27, 2023,
the Request Court Sign Order for New Trial Rule 60 Due to Violation of Rule 73, filed January 31,
2023, Section 12-512 Opposition to an Award, filed February 3, 2023, Requesting This Court Sign
and Approved Order from September 8, 2022, filed February 3, 2023, and February 1, 2023 Clerk
Handed Me a Sticky Note to Send My Motions Going Forward to Judge Bachus, filed February 7,
2023. Taking no action as this Court no longer has jurisdiction now that the matter has been
appealed.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/22/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/17/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Escarcega

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed three requests (filed 12/22/21, 12/29/21, and
1/04/2022) and one motion (filed 12/22/21) by Plaintiff Nancy Berent. No other Party has
responded to these filings, but none of them appear to seek any relief the Court could properly
grant while the Parties are engaged in the present, binding, Certified Arbitration proceedings.
Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED denying the requests and the motion.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/22/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/18/2022

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Escarcega

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
KELSEY DRESSEN
KENNETH L FIELDS
CITS
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed a packet of documents filed February 16, 2022, by
Plaintiff Nancy Berent per her apparent Power of Attorney (“POA”) who remains unidentified
except for partially illegible signatures on some of the documents. It is unknown if the POA is
licensed to practice law in Arizona, and the POA attaches no appointing papers giving her
authorization to file items on Plaintiff Ms. Berent’s behalf. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED striking and not considering the packet in its entirety, particularly as the
packet appears to be directed at prosecuting authorities instead of related to this civil court matter.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, good cause appearing, authorizing and directing Court
Interpretation and Translation Services to locate and provide a Polish interpreter to allow the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/18/2022

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

Parties to successfully engage in the certified arbitration proceedings before Certified Arbitrator
Hon. Ken Fields (Judge Ret.), who was appointed on November 2, 2021, pursuant to Admin. Order
No. 2021-106.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/22/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/21/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KEVIN M ARNOLD
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider Plaintiffs’ Motion for Bench
Trial filed January 15, 2019, Defendant/Cross-Defendant’s Response to Motion to Reconsider
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Bench Trial filed February 7, 2019, and Defendants Mroczkoska Response
and Joinder “Response” to Motion to Reconsider Plaintiffs’ Motion for Bench Trial filed
February 11, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider Plaintiff’s Motion for Bench
Trial filed January 15, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/22/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/21/2019

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KEVIN M ARNOLD
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

This division having been newly assigned,

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference re: Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend
Expert Disclosure filed January 23, 2019, Reset Final Trial Management Conference, and Trial
Date for March 8, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. (15 minutes allotted). Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate
the telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of all other counsel on the
conference call and by calling this division at: (602)506-5121 at least five minutes before the
scheduled time. The parties and counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences
via cell phones or speakerphone.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/21/2019

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to
the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must
pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the
proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/04/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

02/27/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KEVIN M ARNOLD
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received has received Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Reply in Support
of Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure filed February 22, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Reply by March 13, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/03/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/02/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTIONS REJECTED

The Court has received Nancy Berent’s February 9, 2023 Request Judge Order Vision Mgt,
to Follow Self Help Rules Violated By Clint Goodman HOA Collections Lawyer, February 9, 2023
Notice of Pending Request for Bench Warrants Discovery Sent to County DA, February 19, 2023
Award Contains Material Prejudicial Errors of Law, Not Based in Appropriate Legal Basis
Clearly Unsupported By Court Records, February 19, 2023 Rule 91(e) Violation Numerous
Motions Not Responded To, February 20, 2023 Notice of Filing a Stay In Court of Appeals MCSO
Has 4 Year Pending Investigation, February 20, 2023 Court of Appeals Discovery February 20,
2023 Motion Filed December 21, 2021 Still Not Responded to Judge Bachus.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting all of Nancy Berent’s Motions listed above. Taking no action
as this Court no longer has jurisdiction and cannot rule on them since the matter has been
appealed.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/05/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/04/2021

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received what appears to be an unauthorized ex parte facsimile
transmission dated February 23, 2021, and, pursuant to Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct canon
2.9(B), Rule 81, Ariz. R. Sup. Ct.,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED filing the correspondence into the record of this matter and
thereby notifying all Parties of the substance of the communication. Any Party may respond to
the communication via an appropriate filing with the Court in the above matter.

ATTENTION SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANTS:

Unless an attorney files a notice that he or she represents a party, the person(s) not
represented by counsel will act as his or her own lawyer. The law requires the Court to hold all
persons representing themselves to the same standard as a licensed attorney. Self-represented

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/04/2021

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

litigants are encouraged to review the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, paying particular
attention to Rules 16, 26, 26.1, and 37.

Before the Judge can consider anything a self-represented litigant submits—whether
email to Court staff or otherwise, you must show that you have given a copy of the submission:

1. To the Clerk of the Court. The Clerk of the Court is a separately elected official and acts
through his deputies. It is the Clerk’s job to keep an independent record of everything that
happens at the Court. (The Court cannot act on a document that has not been made a part
of that record); and

2. To every other party involved in the case, through their lawyer if they have counsel. This
is so all parties have a fair chance to tell the Judge what they think before a decision is
made.

Because of that, if you want the Judge to consider something you submit, you must file
the original document with the Clerk of the Superior Court, mail or deliver a copy directly to this
Division (that is, to the Judge, using the specific Courtroom address), and mail or deliver a copy
to all opposing parties. In addition, on each document you must include a signed certificate that
says whether you mailed or hand delivered each copy, when you did so, and states the specific
people and the specific addresses to which you mailed or hand delivered each copy. If a party is
represented by a lawyer, you must send or deliver the copy to the lawyer, not to the party. All
proposed orders submitted to this Division in hard copy must include copies of the order with
self-addressed, stamped envelopes for all parties/counsel.

Do not mail or send papers for the Clerk or other parties to the Judge.

If you want to file papers with the Clerk of the Court by mail, please send them to:

Clerk of the Superior Court’s Office
Civil File Counter
201 W. Jefferson
Phoenix, AZ 85003

The Clerk’s guidelines for filing by mail can be found at:
https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/filings

If you are not represented by a lawyer you must contact this Division immediately and
give us a current email address, address, and telephone number. If your addresses (email and
physical) or phone number change in the future, you must contact this Division immediately

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/04/2021

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3

upon the changes occurring and give us the current information. This Division can be reached via
(602) 506-8288 and [email protected] as well as
[email protected].

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE CONTES

STATUS CONFERENCE SET

Courtroom 102 - NE

8:43 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff Nancy Berent
is present telephonically on her own behalf. Plaintiff Michael Berent is neither present nor
represented by counsel. Defendants Grazyna Mroczkowska, Marta Mroczkowski and Miroslaw
Mroczkowski are represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway, who appears personally.
Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. is represented by counsel, Maria R.
Kupillas, who appears in person.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED the existing order requiring the parties to participate in a settlement
conference with Judge Contes is affirmed. The plaintiffs are required to participate in a
settlement conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are required to participate in good faith in
a settlement conference prior to the next hearing. The only exception that the Court will allow
for is if Judge Contes is not able to find a date within that time. The Court’s request to Judge
Contes is that she make every effort to afford the parties time for a settlement conference within
the next sixty days and that she give them as many alternatives as possible so that the plaintiffs
can arrange to participate.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the plaintiffs fail to participate in a settlement
conference, the Court is going to exercise its discretion to dismiss this lawsuit for failure to
comply with this Court’s orders.

The Court will review all other pending motions and issue a separate ruling.

9:07 a.m. Hearing concludes.

LATER:

IT IS ORDERED setting a Status Conference on May 10, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. (30
minutes allotted) in this division. The parties and counsel are directed to appear in person
before:

Judge John R. Hannah
Northeast Regional Court
18380 N. 40th St., Courtroom 102
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0759

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/14/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KEVIN M ARNOLD
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108-NE

9:02 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference re: Plaintiff’s Motion to
Extend Expert Disclosure filed January 23, 2019, Reset Final Trial Management Conference, and
Trial Dates. Counsel Kristin Roebuck is present on behalf of Plaintiff Michael Berent. Plaintiff
Nancy Berent is present on her own behalf. Cousel Debra Brockway is present on behalf of
Defendants Grazyna Mroczkowska, Marta Mroczkowska, and Miroslaw Mroczkowska. Counsel
Kevin Arnold is present on behalf of Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Matters discussed.

Based upon the matters presented in Court,

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiffs Motion to Withdraw With Consent as Attorney of
Record for Nancy Berent filed March 7, 2019.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure filed January
23, 2019 to June 7, 2019, for a New Appraisal only.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all rebuttals shall be completed by July 8, 2019.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming previous order with respect to the conduct of the
plaintiffs:

 Any request for information shall be directed first to the defendants’ attorneys,
before the filing of a motion or request to the Court. The request shall be made in
writing. If the information is not provided and the plaintiffs move to compel
production, the motion shall include the letter to defendants’ counsel, attached to
the motion as proof that there has been a request directly to counsel. Any request
to compel information that does not have attached to it the letter showing that
counsel was first asked for that information will not be considered by the Court.

 All filings shall include a statement in the caption of specifically what is being
requested in that filing. A general description is not sufficient. The caption shall
say “motion to” or “request to” and then it shall specify what it is that the
plaintiffs are asking the Court to order, and which defendant(s) specifically it is
being directed to. If it is directed to both defendants it shall specifically say that.
Any defendant who is not named in the caption as being the party at whom this
motion or request is directed will not be required to respond and the Court will
take no action.

 The Plaintiffs shall refrain from arguing their case in filings that have no purpose
other than to argue the case. The content of the filings is to be directed to
whatever request is being made in that filing. The Court will not consider pretrial
filings that are meant as arguments of the plaintiffs’ position on the merits in the
case and the defendants will not be required to respond to any such filings.

 Counsel for the defendants are not required to respond to, and the Court will not
consider, any accusations of wrongdoing or misconduct unless the Court orders a
response.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no response is required to Plaintiff Nancy Berents
motions/report unless specifically ordered by the court.

Discussion further held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

IT IS ORDERED the parties shall only contact each during business hours, 8:00 a.m.
through 6:00 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a 5-Day Jury Trial on August 5-August 8, 2019 and
August 12, 2019. Trial hours are as follows: from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., before:

THE HONORABLE JUDGE CYNTHIA BAILEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING.

Please note that normal trial days in this division are Monday through Thursday. First day
shall commence at 9:30 a.m., each day after will commence at 9:00 a.m. (unless otherwise
ordered). The lunch break will be taken at 12:00 p.m., with the afternoon session to begin promptly
at 1:30 p.m. A fifteen (15) minute break will be taken both mid-morning and mid-afternoon, with
the trial day to end at 4:30 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Final Pretrial Management Conference on July
16, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. (1 hour allotted). The Pretrial Management Conference shall be governed
by the Pretrial Management Orders issued this date. Trial counsel and/or the parties shall attend
this conference in person.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all trial exhibits shall be submitted for marking not later
than July 26, 2019.

No information disclosed after the dates contained in the order may be used at the trial
absent court order on motion and affidavit.

The proceedings will take place in the Superior Court’s new “e-courtroom.” A record of
the proceedings will often, but not always, be made by FTR in lieu of a court reporter. If a court
reporter is required, the Court must receive a written request prior to the Trial Management
Conference set. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed
without a court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

counsel may request a CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD is requested, please
obtain a form from the Self Center to request a daily copy of a court hearing or trial proceeding
being conducted and pay the applicable fee. Should an official transcript be required, you may
request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay for it.

If the parties are not familiar with the courtroom’s technology, they are encouraged to set
up an appointment with the court’s technology liaison at 602.372.7876.

9:58 a.m. Matter concludes.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant to
Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter is
not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay
the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding.
The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

PRETRIAL STATEMENT ORDERS

1. IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) in accordance with Rule
16(d), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) is due in this division by 5:00 p.m., July 9, 2019.

2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Joint Pretrial Statement shall contain the following:

(A) Stipulations of material fact and law;

(B) Such contested issues of fact and law as counsel can agree are material or applicable;

(C) A separate statement by each party of other issues of fact and law believed by that
party to be material;

(D) A list of witnesses intended to be used by each party during trial. Each party shall list
any objections to a witness and the basis for that objection. No witness shall be used at the trial
other than those listed, except for good cause shown. Witnesses whose testimony will be received
by deposition testimony only will be so indicated;

(E) Each party’s final list of exhibits to be used at trial for any purpose, including
impeachment. Plaintiffs shall deliver copies of all of their exhibits to all parties twenty days before
the final pretrial conference. All other parties shall deliver copies of all their exhibits to all parties
fifteen days before the final pretrial conference. Any exhibit that cannot be reproduced must be
made available for inspection to all parties on or before the deadlines stated above. Each party
shall list any objections to an exhibit and the basis for that objection. No exhibit shall be used at
the trial other than those listed, except for good cause shown. The parties shall indicate any
exhibits which the parties stipulate can be admitted into evidence, such stipulations being subject
to court approval;

(F) A statement by each party indicating any proposed deposition summaries or
designating portions of any deposition testimony to be offered by that party at trial, other than for
impeachment purposes. Deposition testimony shall be designated by transcript page and line
numbers. A copy of any proposed deposition summary and written transcript of designated
deposition testimony should be filed with the Joint Pretrial Statement. Each party shall list any
objections to the proposed deposition summaries and designated deposition testimony shall be
used at trial other than that designated or counter-designated or for impeachment purposes;

(G) A brief statement of the case to be read to the jury during voir dire. If the parties
cannot agree on this statement, then each party shall submit a separate statement to the judge who
will decide the contents of the statement to be read to the jury;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6

(H) Technical equipment needed or interpreters requested;

(I) The number of jurors and alternates agreed upon, whether the alternates may deliberate,
and the number of jurors required to reach a verdict;

(J) Whether any party will invoke Rule 615 of the Arizona Rules of Evidence regarding
exclusion of witnesses from the courtroom; and

(K) A brief description of settlement efforts.

3.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that at the time of filing the joint pretrial statement,
both parties shall submit a joint draft proposed final jury instructions, in Word, with all case
citations and RAJI references removed from the draft. In the event that the parties disagree on a
particular jury instruction, both parties’ proposed jury instruction shall be included in the draft
proposed jury instructions with the notation “Disputed” in the name of the instruction.

4.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each party who will be submitting a trial
memorandum shall file such memorandum five days before the final pretrial conference, or if no
conference is scheduled, five days before the trial.

MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Pursuant to Rule 7.2(a) ARCP, counsel shall meet and confer to discuss and identify any
disputed evidentiary issues that are anticipated to be the subject of motions in limine. The parties
are directed to provide the court with a written report of agreements reached at the conference so
that the court can enforce such agreements. At the time of filing any motions in limine, counsel
shall also provide the court notice that counsel have met in person prior to the filing of said motions
in limine or the motion(s) may be stricken.

Motions in limine shall be filed only in accordance with Rule 7.2, ARCP. Motions in
limine shall be filed thirty (30) days before the PTMC and such motions must meet the test of State
v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 397, 499 P.2d 152 (1972). No “prophylactic” motions in limine
may be filed. A written response to a motion in limine may be filed no later than ten (10) days
thereafter. The Court will rule on the motions in limine without oral argument. If the Court wishes
to hear argument, the argument will be heard at the PTMC. No replies shall be filed.

Unless prior written leave of Court is obtained for good cause shown, no party may
file more than three (3) motions in limine, including all subparts. The parties shall not file

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7

motions denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for summary
judgment.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

All motions, other than motions in limine, shall be filed not later than ninety (90) days
prior to the date set for trial unless otherwise ordered by the court.

Notices of Settlement

In accordance with the provisions of ARCP 41(a), to be effective, any Notice of
Settlement or Dismissal providing for resolution of one or more pending claims that is filed
after service by the opposing party’s answer or dispositive motion, must be signed by each
affected party (or appropriate counsel) prosecuting or defending against the claim(s) covered
by the Notice. Each filed Notice shall state whether it resolves all pending issues in the case
and constitutes a representation to the Court that the claims subject to the Notice have been
fully resolved with respect to Notice signatories, and that the only further relief to be sought
with respect to such claims is entry of an order that each signatory confirms is consistent
with the agreement that gave rise to filing of the Notice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Time Estimates for Trial attached hereto shall be
submitted on the same date as the parties’ Joint Pretrial Statement as ordered herein.

ATTACHED: SAMPLE FORMAT FOR TIME ESTIMATE FORM AND EXHIBIT
PROCEDURES

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 8

CAUSE NUMBER

CASE CAPTION

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL

DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL
(NOTE: Add additional lines as needed for additional parties and or witnesses.)

TIME ESTIMATES FOR TRIAL

Opening Statement and Closing Argument

PLAINTIFF'S OPENING STATEMENT

DEFENDANT'S OPENING

PLAINTIFF'S CLOSING

DEFENDANT'S CLOSING

PLAINTIFF'S REBUTTAL

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

PLAINITIFF'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

DEFENDANT'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

The foregoing are based on the best estimates of counsel of the time reasonably needed to
complete the necessary examination of the witnesses listed.

____________________________________
Counsel for Plaintiff
___________________________________
Counsel for Defendant

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL WHEN PREPARING EXHIBITS FOR USE IN COURT

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 9

COUNSEL PLEASE READ

Exhibits are due to the Court not later than July 26, 2019.

If Defendant’s exhibits are received prior to Plaintiff’s exhibits, the Clerk may mark them
first with Plaintiff’s exhibits following.

Exhibits will be marked consecutively, Plaintiff’s exhibits are marked first and then
Defendant’s exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a
later date. To avoid confusion during trial, it is essential that counsel avoid submitting duplicate
exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later date. Do
not list “Any and all exhibits listed by ….” Depositions will not be marked as an exhibit. Original
depositions to be used for impeachment purposes shall be provided to the clerk on the first day of
trial/hearing to be hand-filed by the clerk.

*******If a party is submitting more than 100 exhibits, that party shall submit those
exhibits in three-ring, tabbed binders.********

****Each multiple page exhibit must be securely fastened together by staple or other
means. NO PAPER CLIPS, BINDER CLIPS, OR RUBBER BANDS may be used. If Acco
fasteners are used they must be long enough to fasten securely.****

Counsel are to provide a workable list of exhibits. The list should include a description of
each exhibit. (See blank sample of an exhibit table below as a reference.) Do not put numbers on
the exhibits; however a colored sheet of paper with the exhibit number on it should be placed
in front of each exhibit.

Exhibit Description Information:

The descriptions should be verifiable when viewing the first page of the exhibit.

Letter designations such as 5A, 5B, etc. shall not be used.

No bates stamp references or number of pages in documents should be used.

If counsel are submitting large charts, blow-ups or maps, please include a small version
which can be marked as the exhibit and can go into the jury if in evidence. The blow-ups, charts
and/or maps can be used as demonstrative but will not be marked as exhibits and will be returned
to counsel.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/08/2019

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 10

For additional assistance in preparation of exhibits contact the courtroom clerk at 602-372-
7732.

Sample of List of Exhibits to be provided to the courtroom clerk:

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit
No.
Identi-
fied By

Description
Stipulated in
Evidence/
Objection

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/13/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/10/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

CV2017-052655 - Signing September 8, 2022, Minute Entry & Rejecting Other
Documents

This Court is in receipt of three additional filings by Plaintiff Nany Berent. None of these
filings complies with the Rules of Civil Procedure nor is it clear that these documents were served
on the opposing party. The document filed March 1, 2023, and titled “June 22, 2022 motion to set
aside a judgment has not been signed. Per court docket clerk of superior court has no written
agreement,” appears to be in response to the Court of Appeals’ Order Continuing Stay, dated
February 28, 2023. As directed by the Court of Appeals and interpreting Ms. Berent’s March 1,
2023, filing as a motion for a signed order corresponding to the September 8, 2022 ruling, this
Court will sign this minute entry incorporating its minute entry from September 8, 2022. Therefore,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/10/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

This minute entry is issued to add a signature line to the order entered on September 8,
2022, the entire content of which is included in this minute entry below:

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s June 22, 2022, Motion to Set Aside a
Judgment Due to Bring Denied a Necessary Medical Continuance by Defendants.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s June 22, 2022, Motion to Set Aside a Judgment Due
to Bring Denied a Necessary Medical Continuance by Defendants.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED rejecting the documents filed by Nancy Berent on February
24, 2023, titled “Notice of Court of Appeals Management Statement” and on March 1, 2023 titled
“Court Rule 91 e has been violated by Judge Julian who has failed to sign an order to set aside
judgement [sic] based on 73a violation” as these are not proper pleadings or motions and do not
appear to have been served on the opposing parties as required by Rule 5(a), Arizona Rules of
Civil Procedure.

HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/14/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/13/2018

Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CONNIE CONTES
D Arrieta

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

MARIA R KUPILLAS

JEFFREY T MURRAY

JUDGE HANNAH

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SET

By minute entry dated 03/08/2018 Honorable Judge Hannah ordered the parties to
participate in a settlement conference. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED setting Settlement Conference on March 28, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. (time
allotted: 3 hours).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties and counsel, as well as any non-lawyer
representatives with authority to settle the case, insurance adjusters, shall appear in person
before:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/13/2018

Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 2

THE HONORABLE CONNIE CONTES
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W. JEFFERSON
9TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 913
PHOENIX, AZ 85003
PHONE: (602) 506- 7768

Please Note: Defendant Grazyna Mroczkowska and claims representative for Bell West
Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. may appear telephonically as long as someone with full
authority to settle this matter is present.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party shall prepare a settlement memorandum
and submit it to this division’s Judicial Assistant, by 5:00 p.m. on March 21, 2018.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall exchange their settlement memoranda,
but shall NOT file them with the Clerk of the Court.

NOTE: Pursuant to Rule 16.1(h), A.R.C.P., failure to comply with this Order may result
in the Court imposing sanctions.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/19/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/17/2020

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

On the Court's own motion,

IT IS ORDERED resetting the Final Trial Management Conference set for March 19,
2020 at 9:30 a.m., with no objection from counsel,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all counsel may appear telephonically.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/20/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/19/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
EDM-QC-CCC

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

On the Court’s own motion pursuant to Civil Rule 12(f),

IT IS ORDERED striking and removing the pleading entitled “Emergency Hearing
Competency Hearing Debra Brockway Defendants Attorney” filed by plaintiff Michael Berent
on March 14, 2018, docket event code 092 in its entirety.

The Clerk is directed to remove that item from the docket immediately.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/23/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/19/2020

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

TRIAL VACATED

Northeast Regional Court - Courtroom 108

9:31 a.m. This is the time set for Final Trial Management Conference. Plaintiffs Michael
Berent and Nancy Berent are represented by counsel, Thomas C. Horne and Kristin M. Roebuck,
who appear telephonically. Defendants Marta Mroczkowski and Miroslaw Mroczkowski are
represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway, who appears personally. Defendant Bell West Ranch
Homeowners Association Inc. is represented by counsel, Kevin M. Arnold, who appears
telephonically.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

Pursuant to the Administrative Order issued yesterday that no jury trials shall be conducted
through April 17, 2020,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/19/2020

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Jury Trial set to commence on April 13, 2020 in this
division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Telephonic Trial Setting Conference on April 23,
2020 at 9:00 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) for the purpose resetting the trial date. Counsel shall
have their trial calendars available. Counsel for the Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call (602)
506-5121.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the parties to meet and confer and present the
Court with an amended joint pretrial statement. In addition to filing the amended joint pretrial
statement, counsel shall also email a copy to this division’s Judicial Assistant in Word format.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing Ms. Roebuck to provide the Court with case law
to support Plaintiffs’ requested jury instruction regarding trespass not necessitating damages.

The Court notes that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Ruling on Declaratory Relief, filed March 10,
2020 is outstanding. The Court will review the motion once it is fully briefed and set oral
argument, if necessary.

Arguments are heard on Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine. The Court will require the parties
to approach the Court prior to attempting to illicit any information about the personal animosity
between the parties or issues relating to mental health, immigration status and inappropriate
communication.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall admonish their clients about what the
Court’s ruling is on Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine.

9:51 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/22/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS

ORDER SIGNED

There have been a number of filings in this case since the last round of rulings. This
order is intended to address all outstanding issues and to reset the scheduling order.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that, pursuant to the order concerning the plaintiffs’
litigation conduct entered November 21, 2017 as a ruling on the motion to designate the
plaintiffs as vexatious litigants, the Court has not acted, and will not act, on the following filings
by the plaintiffs:

 “Strike Defendants Accusations Against Litigants Unfounded / Retaliatory Abuse of
Power / Fear Tactics,” filed November 20, 2017;
 “Contempt of FOIA Requests by Defendants’ Attorney Debra Brockway,” filed March
12, 2018;
 “Contempt of Order of Protection Felony – Debra Brockway Repeated Verbal Insults in
Front of Judge Hannah,” filed on March 12, 2018.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 2

The filing entitled “Contempt of Order of Protection Felony – Debra Brockway Repeated Verbal
Insults in Front of Judge Hannah” has been stricken from the docket, pursuant to Civil Rule
12(f), by a separate minute entry order.

As to the “Stipulation to Admit Medical Documentation for Casual Relationship Pain and
Suffering Permanent Damage,” filed November 20, 2018,

IT IS ORDERED the request to order the admission of the records in advance of the trial
is denied.

The Court previously ordered that the “Third Amended Complaint,” filed October 17,
2017 and the “Response to Defendants Response to Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Third Amended
Complaint,” filed October 30, 2017, would be addressed together and treated as a motion by the
plaintiffs to amend the complaint. Though the proposed pleading is not the “short, plain
statement of the claim” required by Civil Rule 8(a), it will be “construed so as to do justice” as
required by Rule 8(f). With that in mind, the Court has attempted to distill from the pleading the
allegations that do not appear in the existing complaint and that might support a cause of action.

IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs may amend the existing complaint by adding, as a
general allegation and as an element of the First Claim for Relief (Declaratory Judgment), Fourth
Claim for Relief (Breach of Contract – the Association) and Fifth Claim for Relief (Negligence –
the Association) that

The Association failed to follow its own rules by approving the Mroczkowskas’
driveway extension when (1) the Architectural Review Committee that
recommended approval was not properly constituted; (2) the application was
missing material information, including the square footage of the proposed
driveway extension and the identity of the contractor; and (3) the “Neighbors’
Approval” was not submitted with the application.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs may amend the existing complaint by
adding, as a general allegation and as an element of each Claim for Relief, that

The Mroczkowskas’ driveway extension covers a greater percentage of the front
yard of their property than is permitted by the applicable CC & Rs and City
ordinances.

To be clear, the Court is not endorsing these allegations, or making any findings as to their legal
or factual sufficiency. The plaintiffs are simply being allowed to add the allegations to the
complaint, at which point the defendants will have a full opportunity to test them.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the plaintiffs shall prepare a Third Amended Complaint
that is consistent with this order, and file and serve such complaint, within ten days of the date on
which the Clerk issues this order.

The plaintiffs have not alleged facts sufficient to state a claim for fraud. See Ariz. R.
Civ. P. 9(b) (pleading must state the circumstances constituting fraud with particularity). The
plaintiff also have not alleged facts that would give rise to claims against the HOA’s lawyers, or
claims against the HOA’s management company and its employees. The duties of the HOA’s
contractors generally run to the HOA, not to individual HOA members. Therefore, as to these
issues, and any others that have not been discussed herein,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint is denied
except as specifically stated in this order.

As to the “Request for Reassignment of Mediator,” the Court takes no action as this issue
was addressed at the Status Conference on March 9, 2018.

In the “Advisory; and Motion to Allow Counterclaim” filed by the defendants
Mroczkowska on December 22, 2017, the Mroczkowskas ask permission to file a claim for
breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. The factual basis of the proposed claim,
reduced to its essence, is that the Bell West Ranch CC & Rs amount to a mutual covenant among
the homeowners for peaceful and quiet enjoyment of their respective homes, and that the Berents
have breached that covenant because they have not been “good neighbors.”

The Court is not persuaded that such a broad contract claim is cognizable as a matter of
law. The Mroczkowskas present no authority to that effect.

IT IS ORDERED the Motion to Allow Counterclaim is denied.

As to the plaintiffs’ “Motion to compel Bell West Ranch to produce public records foia
request denied by counsel,”

IT IS ORDERED the motion is granted in part as to Request No. 7. Defendant Bell West
Ranch shall produce the minutes of any Board meeting (including Executive Sessions) at which
the Mroczkowskas’ driveway or the dispute over the driveway was discussed, except that any
Executive Session minutes that reflect privileged attorney-client communications may be
withheld or redacted so long as the plaintiffs are provided a privilege log. Bell West Ranch is
not required to produce email communications between the Board and its attorney Mr.
Goodman.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the balance of the motion. Request No. 1 (the
entire property record for 17986 N. 167th Dr.) is overbroad. Requests 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 seek
information that is neither relevant nor likely to lead to discovery of information that is relevant.

As to the plaintiffs’ “Motion to Compel Defendants to Produce Public Records
Requests,” which is directed to the Mroczkowskas, the Court finds that the receipt or contract for
the driveway installation, and documents relating to payment for that work, are potentially
relevant to this case.

IT IS ORDERED the plaintiffs’ motion to compel is granted with respect to such
documents. The Mroczkowskas shall produce those documents.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, as a protective order issued pursuant to the Court’s
authority under Civil Rule 26(c)(1), that the plaintiffs may not use the information contained in
those documents in a lawsuit against the contractor.

The rest of the information requested by the plaintiffs is not relevant to this case.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED the motion to compel is denied as to all other requests
for production directed to the Mroczkowskas.

Finally, as to the issue of scheduling.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that an Amended Scheduling Order is being entered
contemporaneously with this order all in accordance with the formal written Order signed by the
Court on March 20, 2018 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on March 20, 2018.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

IT IS ORDERED converting the Status Conference set on May 10, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. to
a Trial Setting Conference (30 minutes allotted) in this division. The parties and counsel are
directed to appear in person.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/21/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE CONTES

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

The Court has reviewed and considered plaintiffs’ Motion to Continue Settlement
Conference Currently Set for March 28, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS ORDERED the motion to continue the settlement conference is granted. The Court
leaves it to Judge Contes's discretion to set a new date.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/21/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/20/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
EDM-QC-CCC

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

On the Court’s own motion pursuant to Civil Rule 12(f),

IT IS ORDERED striking and removing the pleading entitled “Contempt of Order of
Protection Felony – Debra Brockway Repeated Verbal Insults in Front of Judge Hannah” filed
on March 12, 2018, docket event code 090, in its entirety.

The Clerk is directed to remove that item from the docket immediately.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/25/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

03/23/2020

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE RESET

On the Court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Telephonic Trial Setting Conference set on April 23, 2020
and resetting the same to April 24, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) for the purpose of
assigning a trial date and a final pretrial management conference date if the case has not settled.
Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. This hearing will proceed as telephonic only.
Counsel for the Plaintiff shall initiate the telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of
all other counsel on the conference call and by calling this division at: (602) 506-5121 at least five
minutes before the scheduled time. The parties and counsel shall not be permitted to
participate in conferences via cell phones or speakerphone.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/03/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/01/2020

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE RESET

Upon further consideration, due to COVID-19 and on the Court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Telephonic Trial Setting Conference set on April 24, 2020
and resetting the same to June 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) for the purpose of
assigning a trial date and a final pretrial management conference date if the case has not settled.
Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. Counsel for the Plaintiff shall initiate the
telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of all other counsel on the conference call
and by calling this division at: (602) 506-5121 at least five minutes before the scheduled time. The
parties and counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences via cell phones or
speakerphone.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/03/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/02/2018

Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CONNIE CONTES
D Arrieta

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE HANNAH

MINUTE ENTRY

By minute entry dated 03/20/2018 Honorable Judge Hannah granted plaintiffs’ motion to
continue the settlement conference. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED setting Settlement Conference on April 19, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. (time
allotted: 3 hours).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties and counsel, as well as any non-lawyer
representatives with authority to settle the case, and insurance adjusters, shall appear in person
before:

THE HONORABLE CONNIE CONTES
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W. JEFFERSON
9TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 913
PHOENIX, AZ 85003
PHONE: (602) 506- 7768

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/02/2018

Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 2

Please Note: Defendant Grazyna Mroczkowska and claims representative for Bell West
Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. may appear telephonically as long as someone with full
authority to settle this matter is present.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party shall prepare a settlement memorandum
and submit it to this division’s Judicial Assistant, by 5:00 p.m. on April 12, 2018.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall exchange their settlement memoranda,
but shall NOT file them with the Clerk of the Court.

NOTE: Pursuant to Rule 16.1(h), A.R.C.P., failure to comply with this Order may result
in the Court imposing sanctions.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/08/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/04/2019

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KEVIN M ARNOLD
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has reviewed the materials filed in support of and in opposition to Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment filed on December 7, 2018 and Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment filed December 7, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on the above-noted Motion(s) for April 17, 2019
at 9:00 a.m. (1 hour allotted). Counsel and any unrepresented parties shall appear in person for
this hearing before:

THE HONORABLE CYNTHIA BAILEY
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH ST., COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, AZ 85032
PHONE: 602-506-5121

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/04/2019

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant to
Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter is
not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay
the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding.
The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/15/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/12/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Request to Extend Discovery Due to New Records
filed at Maricopa County Recorder June 2018, July 2018 and MCSO filed March 26, 2019.

No good cause shown,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Request to Extend Discovery filed March 26, 2019.

Plaintiffs seek to extend discovery by issues related to A.R.S. § 33-420. The Third
Amended Complaint does not implicate A.R.S. § 33-420 and therefore is not relevant. Response
from Defendant is not required pursuant to the order of the court.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/19/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/16/2019

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108-NE

11:30 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference re: Resetting Oral
Argument on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed December 7, 2018 and Plaintiff’s
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed December 7, 2018. Counsel Kristin Roebuck is
present on behalf of Plaintiff Michael Berent. Plaintiff Nancy Berent is present on her own
behalf. Counsel Debra Brockway is present on behalf of Defendant Grazyna Mroczkowska,
Marta Mroczkowska, and Miroslaw Mroczkowski. Counsel Kevin Arnold is present on behalf
of Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/16/2019

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on May 21, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. (1 hour
allotted), in this division.

11:34 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/18/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/17/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SUSAN M. BRNOVICH
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
LORI N BROWN

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

MARIA R KUPILLAS
MARTA MROCZKOWSKA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
MIROSLAW MROCZKOWSKI
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
COMM. REES

MINUTE ENTRY

This division has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Motion for Default Judgment
against Defendant(s) Miroslaw Mroczkowski and Marta Mroczkowska in the above-captioned
case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).

The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Rees.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a
default judgment must be e-filed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/17/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

Pursuant to Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117, default judgment
packets are not permitted to be e-filed. Accordingly, parties are directed to hand-deliver a
default coversheet and copies of the necessary filed documents to the commissioner’s division
for the entry of a default judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, no further action will be taken by the assigned
commissioner until the necessary filed documents and coversheet are delivered to the division.

The parties/counsel can find the default judgment coversheet on the Court’s website at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/forms.asp

The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked
questions at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/19/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/17/2019

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Oral Argument set April 17, 2019
filed April 9, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Oral Argument.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating Oral Argument set April 17, 2019 and setting a
Telephonic Status Conference on April 16, 2019 at 11:30 a.m. for the purpose of resetting Oral
Argument on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed December 7, 2018 and Plaintiff’s
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed December 7, 2018.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/26/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/19/2018

Docket Code 331
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CONNIE CONTES
D Arrieta

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS

JEFFREY T MURRAY

JUDGE HANNAH

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building – Courtroom 913

2:05 p.m. This is the time set for a Settlement Conference.

The following parties/counsel are present:
Plaintiffs Michael Berent and Nancy Berent are present with counsel, Kristin M. Roebuck
Defendants Marta Mroczkowska and Miroslaw Mroczkowski are present with counsel,
Debra S. Brockway who also represents defendant Grazyna Mroczkowska
Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. is represented by counsel,
Maria R. Kupillas
Larry Boldon (Board Member of Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc.)
Antoinette Yost (Board Member of Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc.)
Regis Salazar (Community Manager of Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc.).

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has reviewed all settlement memoranda submitted.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/19/2018

Docket Code 331
Form V000A
Page 2

All parties express their consent to the Court proceeding in an ex parte fashion.

2:12 p.m. Settlement discussions commence, off the record.

LATER:

The court notes that all parties participated in good faith; however, a settlement was not
reached at today’s conference. Therefore,

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that negotiations are ongoing between the parties.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/20/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

04/19/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTIONS REJECTED

The Court has received Nancy Berent’s March 8, 2023 Notification to Court of Appeals
Judge Refuses to Sign Motions Set to Set Aside Fraudulent Obtained Judgement. Victims Rights
Violations, March 13, 2023, Request for Pro Bono Services Due to Rule Violation 73 Reported
Rule 91e Violation of Judge Julian Conflict of Interest, March 17, 2023, Contempt of Rule 91e by
Judge Julian Court Docket Shows No Written Agreement Since Oct. 2021. Nov 2, 2021, Transcript,
March 21, 2023, Request My Case Be Relocated to New Venue Motion Dated Dec 21, 2021, Filed
Was Reassigned a New Judge Bachus, March 21, 2023, Court of Appeals Needs Updated Mars
Index Superior Court CV2017-052655 CV2016-095220, March 23, 2023, Order Received on
3/16/2023 Is Erroneus [sic] Violation of Clerks Order 12/23/2021 Motion Filed 12/21/2021 Not
On Docket .

IT IS ORDERED rejecting all of Nancy Berent’s Motions listed above.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/04/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/03/2017

Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
LORI N BROWN

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-CCC
JUDGE BRNOVICH
JUDGE HANNAH

CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Susan Brnovich, who has
disqualified herself. The case was transferred to the Presiding Civil Judge for reassignment.

IT IS ORDERED reassigning this case to Civil Calendar CVJ-16, the Honorable John
Hannah, for all further proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all hearings set by the disqualified judge are
vacated, to be reset by the new division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly file within 10 days of the
date of this minute entry, a notice with the new division listing any outstanding motions
(including the file dates), whether they are ripe for resolution, and any hearings that need to be
reset.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/08/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/06/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Pro Per “Motion Requesting Immediate Default
Judgment Removal Illegal Driveway, Damages Due to Fraud Concealment filed March 4, 2019
and Plaintiff’s Pro Per “Personal Injury Due to Clint Goodman’s Malfesance Failure to Report
Fraud of Seniors Real Estate.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting both as Plaintiff’s are represented by an attorney.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/08/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/07/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Defendant’s packet with no title filed in on April 29, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s letter filed April 29, 2019. No responses are
necessary per minute entry issued March 8, 2019.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/10/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2016-095220
CV 2017-052655

05/08/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

BELL WEST RANCH HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARIA R KUPILLAS

v.

NANCY S BERENT, et al.
NANCY S BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

MICHAEL B BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
LORI N BROWN
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

The Court has before it a fax dated April 30, 2017 from Nancy Berent which the Court
cannot consider for the following reasons:

The Court cannot act on a mailed or faxed pleading unless the original document has been
filed with the Clerk of the Court in accordance with Rule 5(a), (g) & (h), Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure and Local Rules 2.1(b) & 2.19.

There is no indication on the document that a copy has been mailed to the opposing side as
required by Rules 5 and 7.1(a), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court cannot consider an ex
parte communication of this nature, nor can it give legal advice.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2016-095220
CV 2017-052655

05/08/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

The document does not contain a proper caption setting forth the name of the court, title of
the action, file number and proper designation of a Motion or request for relief as required by Rule
10(a), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. It is unclear which case number this document relates to.

For the foregoing reasons,

IT IS ORDERED rejecting the fax dated April 30, 2017 from Nancy Berent with no action
taken.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/11/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/08/2020

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has read and considered Plaintiffs Motion for Ruling on Declaratory Relief, filed
March 10, 2020. No Response was filed.

Plaintiffs asks this Court to rule on their declaratory judgment claim prior to the jury trial
on the grounds that there is no material dispute of fact on this issues raised in the Third Amended
Complaint, such that the Court, not the jury, should resolve this claim. Plaintiffs argue that the
fact that the driveway in dispute in this litigation does not comply with the city ordinance is not
disputed by the Mroczkowska Defendants. Plaintiffs assert that “the only defense raised by the
Defendants is that the City of Surprise purported to approve the driveway or at a minimum is not
willing to enforce the City Ordinance.” However, Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint
implicates both actions by the Mroczkowska Defendants and the HOA Defendants in reference to
their claim seeking a declaratory judgment. As is clear from the Court’s prior rulings on various
Motions for Summary Judgment, there are material issues of facts that are disputed as to the
underlying facts necessary to resolve the declaratory relief action.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/08/2020

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

A declaratory judgment action is a remedy for an underlying cause of action; it is not a
separate cause of action. See Steers v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2011 WL 6258219, at *3 (D.Ariz. Dec.
15, 2011) (citation omitted); McMann v. City of Tucson, 202 Ariz. 468, 473, 47 P.3d 672, 678
(App.2002) (noting that a declaratory judgment “remedy” is available “to declare the rights, status,
and other legal relations”) (quoting A.R.S. § 12–1831 and omitting internal quotation marks); Land
Dept. v. O'Toole, 154 Ariz. 43, 47, 739 P.2d 1360, 1364 (Az.Ct.App.1987) (“The declaratory
judgment procedure is not designed to furnish an additional remedy where an adequate one
exists.”); Yares v. Bear Stearns Residential Mortg. Corp., 2011 WL 2531090, at *3 (D.Ariz. June
24, 2011) (holding that claims for declaratory and injunctive relief must be based on “a cognizable
legal theory.”).

Because Plaintiffs first count is not a cause of action; but rather, a remedy that is dependent
upon the success of their other causes of action, the Court declines to rule on the declaratory
judgment count until the trial is concluded.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Plaintiffs Motion for Ruling on Declaratory
Relief, filed March 10, 2020.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/11/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/10/2018

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS

JURY TRIAL SET

Courtroom 102 - NE

8:44 a.m. This is the time set for Status/Scheduling Conference. Plaintiff Nancy Berent
is present telephonically and represented by counsel, Kristin M. Roebuck, who appears
telephonically. Defendants Marta Mroczkowska and Miroslaw Mroczkowski are present
telephonically and represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway, who appears personally.
Defendant Grazyna Mroczkowska has waived her appearance. Defendant Bell West Ranch
Homeowners Association Inc. is represented by counsel, Maria R. Kupillas, who appears
personally.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. This matter is set for Trial to a Jury on April 29, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge
Campagnolo.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/10/2018

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

PLEASE NOTE: Effective June 25, 2018, all cases assigned to Judge John R. Hannah will
be re-assigned to Judge Ted Campagnolo due to judicial calendar rotations. Judge Campagnolo will
be located at the Northeast Regional Court, 18380 N. 40th St., Suite G, Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(telephone: 602-372-0537).

Estimated length of trial is: 5 days.

Trial days are Monday through Thursday. Trial hours are 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and
1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day.

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING. If counsel have any pre-existing conflicts with said
trial date, they shall notify the Court, in writing, within five (5) days from today's date.

Setting a Final Pretrial Conference/Oral Argument on Motions in Limine on April 12,
2019 at 9:00 a.m. (time allotted: 90 minutes) before Judge Campagnolo.

2. The joint pretrial statement in accordance with Rule 16(g), Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure, is due by 5:00 p.m. on March 25, 2019. In addition to the information required by
Rule 16(g), counsel are to identify in/with the joint pretrial statement all deposition or other
transcribed testimony that may be offered at trial. The proposed testimony is to be identified by
reference to page and line numbers. Objections, if any, to such testimony, and the reasons for
such objections, are also to be set forth. Exhibits for trial shall be consecutively numbered
and presented to the Clerk for marking in accord with the joint pretrial statement.

3. Motions in limine shall be due no later than March 25, 2019. Said motions must meet
the test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 499 P.2d 152 (1972): "The primary purpose of
a motion in limine is to avoid disclosing to the jury prejudicial matters which may compel a
mistrial."

Unless prior written leave of Court is obtained for good cause shown, no party may file
more than three (3) motions in limine, limited to three (3) pages in length including all subparts.
The parties shall not file motions denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed
motions for summary judgment.

4. Responses to motions in limine shall be due no later than April 1, 2019. No replies
shall be filed.

5. No less than five (5) judicial days prior to trial, counsel (or the parties) shall file:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/10/2018

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

A. Requested jury instructions and any voir dire questions counsel request that
the Court ask.

For the preliminary jury instructions, counsel are directed to craft a set of
instructions that explains to the jury what the issues in the case are and defines the
law that frames those issues.

The Judge would appreciate counsel providing a copy of the jury instruction
requests on a CD in Microsoft Word.

B. Any trial memoranda (optional), which will be in lieu of post-trial briefs
unless otherwise requested by the Court at the conclusion of the trial.

C. Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (if a request for findings of
fact and conclusions of law has been or will be filed).

6. Any PowerPoint or other computer presentations to be used by any expert witness
during the witness’s testimony shall be disclosed at the time of disclosure of the expert report
and in no event any later than 30 days prior to the taking of the expert’s deposition.
7. No later than April 22, 2019, counsel or their designated representative shall deliver
all trial exhibits along with a list of exhibit descriptions to the clerk of this division. All trial
exhibits shall have been exchanged prior to that time. No duplicate exhibits shall be presented
for marking. The exhibits will be marked numerically and consecutively. Plaintiff(s) exhibits
will be marked first followed by Defendant(s). Exhibits will be marked as they are received.
The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later date. Subsections
of exhibits will be marked as the next available number. Do NOT use subsections of exhibits
(ex. 4a or 4.1). Please use the next consecutive number. Please DO NOT place exhibits in 3-
ring binders when submitting them to the court.

Original depositions are provided to the clerk for filing and are not marked as exhibits.
Counsel shall present original depositions at the same time the exhibits are presented.

Charts, blow-ups and oversize items may be used for demonstrative purposes; however, if
they are to be marked as an exhibit, an 8 ½ x 11 photocopy or photograph of the oversized item
must be provided and will be substituted for the oversize item at the end of trial.

If either party fails to comply with the steps for marking exhibits, that party’s
exhibits may be precluded from being marked at trial.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/10/2018

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

8. All documents and pleadings described above shall be hand-delivered, telefaxed or e-
mailed to opposing counsel on the date they are delivered to the Court.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court
reporter. Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

9:04 a.m. Hearing concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/13/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/11/2021

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

Pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(e)(2),

IT IS ORDERED denying any Motions for Reconsideration of August 2017 rulings in
this matter that are contained in Plaintiffs’ filings of April 13, 2021, and April 21, 2021. The
rulings are nearly four years’ old and are law of the case. Cypress on Sunland Homeowners
Ass’n v. Orlandini, 227 Ariz. 288, 296 (App. 2011).

The Court notes that this matter is set for a six-day trial to a jury beginning July 19, 2021.
Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED setting a June 11, 2021, Trial Planning Conference at 10:15 AM (15
minutes allotted).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/11/2021

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating and resetting the Final Trial Management
Conference previously set on June 18, 2021, to July 2, 2021, at 9:45 AM(15 minutes
allotted). Pretrial deadlines are adjusted accordingly if they are based off the date of the Final
Trial Management Conference (e.g., the deadline for motions in limine).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, per Admin. Order No. 2021-031, the Parties shall
prepare a joint Trial Readiness Form and e-file it (simultaneously submitting a copy via email to
Division
Staff [email protected] and [email protected]),
no later than June 8, 2021; the Trial Readiness Form shall include among its contents:


Filing date of the Complaint in this matter;

Number of anticipated trial days, including jury selection (Court reserves one day for
selection and preliminary instructions), as well as anticipated time for deliberations;

Name and position of essential in-person trial participants (defined below);

Number of jurors desired as optimal venire, and whether the Parties agree to a reduction
in the number of jurors empaneled, and, if so, the agreed upon number;

Whether the Parties request virtual jury selection, in-person jury selection, or hybrid jury
selection (Hybrid jury selection refers to jurors who can appear from home entering the
virtual courtroom while jurors who are unable to appear virtually participate in-person.)

Whether the Parties consent to the jurors using Court Connect to hear the evidence rather
than appearing in-person for trial;

Whether the case could be appropriate for “stand-by status” (Stand-by status refers to a
trial that can begin if parties are given one-week notice.)

Number of any prior trial settings and reasons for continuances;

Preferred dates for trial; and

Whether the case has unique challenges or scheduling issues that affect trial setting.

Essential in-person trial participants include necessary attorney(s), parties or party
representatives, individuals identified by the judge as essential, court reporter, interpreter,
and expert witness(es) if observing trial in-person rather than virtually. All civil courtrooms
have the capability for hybrid trials with some participants virtual and others in-person.
Therefore, individuals can participate in the trial without being physically present in the
courtroom. Witnesses are considered essential trial participants and regardless of the
number of witnesses called on a particular day, the number of essential trial participants
should only identify one “Witness.” For example, only:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/11/2021

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 3

Essential trial participants:
1. Bob Jones: Plaintiff’s attorney
2. Cindy Shell: Plaintiff
3. Interpreter for Cindy Shell
4. John Shell: Plaintiff (John would prefer to appear in-person, but is willing to appear
virtually)
5. Susan Wall: Defendant’s attorney
6. Jordan Glass: Defendant party representative
7. Witness
8. Court reporter

Requested additional participants if spacing permits:
1. Plaintiffs’ paralegal
2. Defendant’s expert for Day 4 of trial (Defendant’s expert can appear virtually to observe
trial if spacing does not permit his physically appearance).
3. Defendant’s co-counsel

For both the June 11, 2021, Trial Planning Conference, and the July 2, 2021, Final
Trial Management Conference, please join the hearing via:

https://tinyurl.com/Courtroom108
You may need to type the link directly into your browser in lieu of clicking.
You can also dial in using your phone.
Phone: +1 917-781-4590 and Conference ID: 929 847 029#
Use of the above link can also be made easier by downloading the Microsoft Teams application
first; for more on the new platform, including an introduction video and participant guide, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/17/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/13/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

A clerical error having been made,

IT IS ORDERED amending minute entry dated May 7, 2019, filed May 8, 2019 to read
as follows:

The Court has received Plaintiff’s packet with no title filed in on April 29, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s letter filed April 29, 2019. No responses are
necessary per minute entry issued March 8, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/22/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/15/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has read and reviewed Plaintiff’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion for Oral
Argument for bench trial filed May 13, 2019. No response is necessary pursuant to the March 8,
2019 minute entry. Plaintiff’s Motion spans 26 pages outlining her positions in the case and
frustrations with the litigation. Short of a trial on the merits of the claim, it is unclear to the
Court what remedy Plaintiff’s seeks. To the extent Plaintiff’s seeks an order of protection she
must apply for the order pursuant to A.R.S. §13-3602 and the Arizona Rules of Protective Order
procedure.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion for Oral
Argument for bench trial filed May 13, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/17/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/15/2024

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
B. Gutierrez/C. Ladden

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

REJECTING

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Rule 72 Section 7 Rule 11(c) Motion, filed March 12,
2024.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Plaintiffs’ Rule 72 Section 7 Rule 11(c) Motion, filed March
12, 2024, for not being a proper pleading.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/17/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/16/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s Motion to Compel Defendants to
Produce Survey of Property in Violation filed May 13, 2019. Plaintiff appears to be arguing the
disputed facts on the case. These issues will abide trial. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks to
compel “public records” from the court, that request is denied. Plaintiffs may retrieve public
records without court permission.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel filed May 13,
2019. No responses are necessary per minute entry issued March 9, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/20/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/17/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Michael Berent III “Counterclaim Personal Injury
Caused by Defendant’s Reckless Despicable Nonfeasance Failure to Report Fraud” filed May
10, 2019.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Plaintiff’s filing as he is represented by an attorney.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/22/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/21/2019

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108-NE

9:58 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument re: Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment filed December 7, 2018 and Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed
December 7, 2018. Counsel Kristin Roebuck is present on behalf of Plaintiff Michael Berent.
Plaintiff Nancy Berent is present on her own behalf. Counsel Kevin Arnold is present on behalf
of Defendant/Cross Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. Counsel Debra
Brockway is present on behalf of Defendants/Cross Claimants Marta Mroczkowska and
Miroslaw Mroczkowska.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Arguments presented.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/21/2019

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2

Based on the arguments presented,

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

10:58 a.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/26/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/25/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court notes that Plaintiff Nancy Berent has made filings in this matter on February 24,
2022; March 4, 2022; March 8, 2022; March 10, 2022; March 28, 2022; March 29, 2022; April 6,
2022; April 6, 2022; April 13, 2022; April 28, 2022; April 29, 2022; and May 5, 2022.

These dozen filings both preceded and succeeded the Certified Arbitrator’s Notice of
Decision, filed March 24, 2022, and Arbitration Award, filed April 4, 2022. The filings that
preceded the Arbitration Award are all presumed to have been addressed by the Certified Arbitrator
appointed pursuant to Admin. Order No. 2021-106 on November 2, 2021. See Atchison, T. & S.F.
Ry. Co. v. Parr, 96 Ariz. 13, 15 (1964).

The couple exceptions would be a Motion to Recuse this division filed March 10, 2022,
and an Appeal from Arbitration, filed March 29, 2022. Plaintiff presents no valid reason for
disqualifying this Court, and this Court advised all Parties repeatedly, both before and after

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

05/25/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

appointing the certified arbitrator, that his decision was binding upon the Parties as they agreed in
open court to participate in the fee-free version of the Certified Arbitration Program. (See Minute
Entry filed November 5, 2021, at 2.) Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s motions to recuse this division and
any relief sought by her attempted appeal from the Arbitration Award.

The filings that succeeded the Arbitration Award must be addressed by this Court, but—as
noted above—the Certified Arbitrator’s Award is binding in this matter, meaning no Party may
appeal or collaterally attack the Award except as otherwise provided by law. Plaintiff Nancy
Berent’s filings that succeed the Award provide no legal grounds for an appeal or collateral attack
on the binding Award. Therefore,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying any relief sought by Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s
filings that succeed the binding Arbitration Award.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants may submit a proposed form of Judgment
on the Arbitration Award not later than twenty days from the filing of these Orders by the Clerk
of the Superior Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court would entertain a motion by any Party to
declare Plaintiff Nancy Berent a vexatious litigant for purposes of this matter only. See A.R.S. §
12-3201.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/06/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/04/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has read and reviewed Plaintiffs Nancy Berent’s Request the Addition of
Witness From Arizona Dept. of Real Estate filed May 29, 2019. No response is necessary
pursuant to the March 8, 2019 minute entry. Short of trial on the merits of the claim, it is unclear
to the Court what remedy plaintiff’s seeks.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiffs Nancy Berent’s Request the Addition of Witness
From Arizona Dept. of Real Estate filed May 29, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/13/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/09/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s Motion to Vacate Judgment,
Motion to Strike Order from Judgment Based on Police Report of Felony in Progress Denied
Medical Continuance, and her Appeal from Arbitration and Motion for Trial Setting, all filed June
3, 2022.

The Motion to Vacate Judgment cites Ariz. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6), and under that rule, “a court
may grant a party relief for ‘any other’ reason not stated in Rules 60(b)(1)–(5). Rule 60(b)(6)
applies when the ‘need for finality [in judgments] must give way in extraordinary
circumstances.’” See Aloia v. Gore, 252 Ariz. 548 (App. 2022). “But Rule 60(b)(6) does not allow
the trial court to re-weigh evidence or review legal errors.” Id.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/09/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

Plaintiff Nancy Berent cites no extraordinary circumstances that require Ariz. R. Civ. P.
60(b)(6) relief. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Vacate Judgment.

Similarly, the Motion to Strike evinces none of the grounds under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(f)(1).
Therefore,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion to Strike.

Finally, as noted in several prior minute entries, the Parties in this case participated in a
binding arbitration pursuant to Admin. Order No. 2021-106. (See Minute Entry filed November 5,
2021, at 2.) There is no appeal right, therefore,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED striking the Appeal from Arbitration and Motion for Trial
Setting.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/16/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
C. Lett

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108 - NER

10:16 a.m. This is the time set for a Trial Planning Conference via Court Connect.
Plaintiff Nancy Berent is present and represented by counsel Jonathan A. Dessaules.
Defendant/Cross Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc., is represented by
counsel Kelsey Dressen for counsel of record, Kevin M. Arnold. Defendant/Cross Claimant
Marta Mroczkowska is present and represented by counsel Debra S. Brockway.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Counsel Brockway notifies the Court that
Defendant/Cross Claimant Miroslaw Mroczkowski has passed away.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 2

Pursuant to Administrative Order 2021-077, the Court is inclined to grant the continuance
requested by Counsel Brockway in the Trial Readiness Form.

Over the objection of Petitioner,

IT IS ORDERED granting continuance of the Trial.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Trial set July 19, 2021 and resetting the 6-
day Trial to a Jury for November 2-4, 8-10, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in this division before:

THE HONORABLE SARA AGNE
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-8288

Jury trial days are normally 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Thursday.

Counsel/Parties shall make note that the Court reserves for itself one (1) day for the
purpose of jury selection and jury deliberations.

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING. Motions to continue based on lack of preparation
will ordinarily not be granted.

If counsel learn of any pre-existing conflicts with said trial date, they shall notify the
Court, in writing, within five (5) days from today’s date.

All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant to Local
Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter is not
mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay
the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding.
The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Requests for interpreters, court reporters or video conference must be made at least
fourteen (14) days prior to the trial/hearing date.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 3

Trial time will be divided between Plaintiff(s) and Defendant(s).

JURY PANEL

A panel of 8 jurors shall decide this matter. The Court, after input from the parties at the
Final Trial Management Conference, shall determine the number of required alternates. The
Court intends to order a total panel of 25 jurors for jury selection. If either party believes that this
would be inadequate, the issue may be addressed at the Final Trial Management Conference.

One day’s jury fees will be assessed against the parties (evenly divided) unless the Court
is notified of settlement by 10:00 a.m. on the judicial day before trial. Counsel are reminded to
promptly notify the Court of any settlement pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 5.3(d). The preferred
method of communication is via e-mail marked “Urgent—Notice of Settlement re Trial” directed
to the Judicial Assistant, Stephanie Castrellon, at
[email protected].

FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/ORAL ARGUMENT

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Final Trial Management Conference set July
2, 2021 and resetting a Virtual Final Trial Management Conference on October 22, 2021 at
10:15 a.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes) in this division. Trial counsel shall appear virtually for
the conference. Any self-represented party shall also appear virtually for the conference. This
minute entry order sets forth tasks that must be completed by trial counsel. Any party that is self-
represented is advised that all tasks imposed upon “counsel” in this minute entry Order apply to
self-represented litigants.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Virtual Trial Planning Conference on
September 24, 2021, at 10:30 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties shall have their positions ready at the
September 24, 2021 Trial Planning Conference regarding the issue of whether the appearance of
Grazyna Mroczkowska can be waived at Trial.

For both the September 24, 2021, Trial Planning Conference and the October 22, 2021 Final
Trial Management Conference, please join the hearing via:

https://tinyurl.com/Courtroom108
You can also dial in using your phone.
Phone: +1 917-781-4590 and Conference ID: 929 847 029#

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 4

Use of the above link can be made easier by downloading the Microsoft Teams application first;
for more on the new platform, including an introduction video and participant guide, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect

Oral Argument on any pretrial motions, including Motions in limine, shall be conducted at
the time of the Final Trial Management Conference.

JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT

A Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) must be filed no later than two weeks before FTMC.
In addition to the materials required by Ariz. R. Civ. P. 16(f)(2), counsel shall meet prior to the
Final Trial Management Conference in order to discuss and prepare the following, which shall be
filed with or included in the JPTS:

A.
Voir Dire: Proposed agreed-upon voir dire questions.

B.
Witnesses: Within the Joint Pretrial Statement, there shall be a list of all
witnesses each party intends to call at trial in the order in which the party
intends to call the witness, together with the estimated time needed for
direct, cross, and redirect examinations.

C.
Jury Instructions and Verdict Forms: A joint set of agreed-upon jury
instructions and verdict forms. Each party shall provide separate sets of
any requested instructions that have not been agreed upon. (Please review
Rosen v. Knaub, 175 Ariz. 329, 332 (1993), before requesting non-RAJI
instructions.) Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (please use the most
current version) need not be retyped, but may be listed by name and
number, such as: (a) RAJI Preliminary 1–Duty of Jurors; (b) RAJI
Standard 2–Burden of Proof; (c) RAJI Negligence 1–Violation of Statute,
etc.

NON-RAJI INSTRUCTIONS shall be typed in Word format, numbered
consecutively, one per page, with legal authority in support of the
instruction, with email copy of the Word document(s) also sent to Division
staff.

D.
Claims: A brief statement of the claims for inclusion in RAJI Preliminary
14–Claims Made and Issues to Be Proved.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 5

E.
Summary of Case: A stipulated brief summary of the case, to be read by
the Court during voir dire.

F.
Deposition Transcripts: A list, by page and line numbers, of all
deposition or other transcribed testimony that may be offered at trial, other
than for impeachment, including designations of testimony that a party
believes ought in fairness to be introduced pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P.
32(a) together with any testimony to be offered by an opposing/other
party. The Court shall also be provided with copies of those parts of any
such testimony to which objection is made, indicating the testimony
objected to and the reasons for such objection. Any objection not so
included is waived. Since jurors generally prefer narrative summaries or
brief excerpts of questions and answers, the Parties should confer and
prepare agreed-upon summaries. Counsel shall present original
depositions for filing at the same time they present exhibits. Original
depositions are provided to the Clerk for the record and are not marked as
exhibits.

G.
Exhibit List: A list of all marked exhibits containing a brief description of
each exhibit and any objections to such exhibits. Any objection not so
included is waived. Again, deposition transcripts are not to be marked
as exhibits.

H.
Expert Disclosures: Copies of all expert disclosures made pursuant to
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26.1(a)(6) and (d).

I.
The number of jurors and alternates agreed on, whether the alternates may
deliberate and the number of jurors required to reach a verdict.

DUTIES AT THE FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Counsel who will try the case shall appear virtually and be prepared to discuss and
resolve:

A.
Allocation of trial time among the parties and, if appropriate, time limits
for voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing
arguments;

B.
Stipulations regarding witnesses testimony and the admission of exhibits;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 6

C.
Jury instructions, juror notebooks, and verdict forms;

D.
Deposition summaries and excerpts from depositions including objections
thereto;

E.
Scheduling, equipment, or interpreter issues;

F.
Status of settlement negotiations;

G.
Motions in limine; and

H.
Other matters addressed in the JPTS.

DUTIES PRIOR TO TRIAL

In advance of the Final Trial Management Conference and/or Trial, the parties shall
attend to the following:

A. Discovery Disputes: If a discovery dispute needs judicial intervention, the Parties
shall comply with Rule 26(d), Ariz. R. Civ. P., and may also email their three-page
joint filing to Division staff to further secure an expedited Rule 26(d) Status
Conference.

B. Motions in limine: The granting or denial of a motion in limine turns on whether
the admission of evidence reaches the level of reversible error or a mistrial. Said
motions must meet the test of State ex rel. Berger v. Superior Ct., 108 Ariz. 396
(1972): “The primary purpose of a motion in limine is to avoid disclosing to the jury
prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial.” Motions in limine are not granted
“except upon a clear showing of non-admissibility.” The Parties shall not file
motions denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for
summary judgment.

1. Page Limit and Format: Neither the motion in limine nor the
response may exceed three pages, including the caption. Showing that the
motion has merit should not require more than that. Motions in limine
shall be consecutively numbered in the caption identifying the party filing
it and the subject of the motion; e.g. “Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 1
Re: Insurance Agreement,” and shall deal with one discrete subject per
motion. Do not respond to more than one motion in limine in each
response.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 7

2. Substance: Any motion in limine or response to such a motion should
begin with a simple declarative sentence that identifies the evidence that is
the subject of the motion, with the understanding that the broader the
scope of the evidence to be excluded, the less likely it is that a motion in
limine will be granted. The remainder of the motion or response should
then explain why a mistrial or reversible error would or would not result if
the motion is denied, with citations to authority that have reached the same
conclusion in the same or similar circumstances (this also applies to
motions in limine based on any failure to disclose, keeping in mind that
nondisclosure implicates Ariz. R. Civ. P. 37(c) and (h)). If the motion is
unable to explain why its denial would result in a mistrial or reversible
error, the remainder should then demonstrate persuasively what efficiency,
economy, or other benefit is to be gained by granting the motion.

3. Rule 7.2: Motions in limine shall be filed in accordance with Ariz. R.
Civ. P. 7.2. Prior to filing any motion in limine, the Parties through
counsel must meet and confer to attempt to resolve issues to be raised by
such motions, and any motions in limine must include a certification that
counsel have so conferred.

4. Deadlines: The deadline for motions in limine is 30 days before the
final pretrial management conference, unless otherwise separately directed
by the Court. Responses must be filed no later than 15 days after service
of the motion in limine. No replies should be filed, unless requested and
approved by the Court.

5. Under Advisement: Although motions in limine will be considered as
quickly as the Court’s schedule permits, they will generally not be taken
under advisement any sooner than 15 days before the start of the trial,
regardless of when they are filed. If the parties believe that a ruling on
such a motion early in the case will facilitate settlement, they should
notify this Division (by telephone at (602) 506-8288 or e-mail to the
judicial assistant, [email protected]) and every
effort will be made to decide the issue as soon as time allows.

C. Daubert Motions: The deadline for any motion brought for a Daubert hearing or
brought under Ariz. R. Evid. 702, is the same as the dispositive motion deadline.
Failure to file such a motion by this date shall constitute a waiver of (1) any

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 8

objection that the expert is not qualified to render expert testimony, and/or (2) any
objection that any opinion of the expert should be excluded under Ariz. R. Evid. 702.

D. Exhibits: The following procedure applies as to all exhibits sought to be utilized at
trial:

The Court prefers hard copy exhibits for jury trials, please visit,
https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/services/exhibits-submission, for
instructions and guidance as well as locations for in-person submission of
exhibits. (This web site also notes that electronic submission of exhibits is
not permitted for jury trials at this time.)

1. Due Date: Exhibits to be offered at trial shall be delivered to the division
clerk no later than two weeks prior to trial date.

2. Organization: Exhibits should be submitted to the Clerk separated by a
tabbed and numbered divider. Staple or otherwise secure each individual
exhibit so that pages do not become separated. If an exhibit is too heavy or
large for a hanging file folder, place it in a binder. Exhibits not securely
bound or bound with binder clips, paper clips, or rubber bands will not be
accepted.

The list of exhibits should contain the case number and caption, the
scheduled trial date, the party submitting the exhibits, the exhibit number,
and a simple description of the exhibit. Keep the descriptions of the
exhibits simple. Do not use a description that cannot be verified by
looking at the document or item. Do not include Bates numbers in your
description of the exhibits, as they do not constitute a simple description.

Exhibits shall be marked numerically and consecutively beginning with
Plaintiff’s exhibits and continuing sequentially with Defendant’s exhibits
(e.g. Plaintiff’s exhibits 1, 2, 3, Defendant’s exhibits 4, 5, 6). Do not skip
numbers. Numbers will not be skipped or saved in anticipation of
additional exhibits not yet submitted. Any missing or skipped exhibits
shall be designated as “Unused.” Additional exhibits, if necessary, may be
marked during the course of trial, although the parties are discouraged
from waiting until trial to mark additional exhibits.

Counsel shall eliminate duplication of exhibits; duplicate exhibits will not
be marked. If duplicate exhibits exist and they are removed by the Clerk

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 9

and not marked, the Court’s numbering will not be consistent with the
numbering counsel provided. Counsel shall, therefore, confer regarding
exhibits to ensure that there are no duplicates.

3. Use of Depositions: Depositions should not be listed on the exhibit
description list because depositions are not marked as exhibits. Original
depositions shall be provided to the Clerk at the time of trial for filing
directly into the court record. Counsel shall retain a copy of the
depositions for their use during the trial. The original depositions remain
with the Clerk to be used as reference by the trial judge during testimony.

4. Demonstrative Evidence: Poster boards and large items may only be used
for demonstrative purposes. Counsel shall advise opposing/other counsel
of any demonstrative poster boards or other items at least three (3) judicial
days prior to trial. Counsel may bring poster boards and large items to
court to use during trial. However, if counsel intends any poster boards or
large items marked as an exhibit, they must provide the clerk with an 8-1/2
x 11 photograph/copy of the item and include the photograph/copy in the
submitted list of exhibits.

5. Failure to Comply: If a party fails to comply with the terms set forth
about, it may result in that party’s exhibit(s) being precluded at trial.

6. Disclosure Objections: If an objection is made at trial relating to untimely
or non-disclosure, the burden is on the proponent of the evidence to
establish that disclosure was properly made. The parties are strongly
encouraged to create their own log for each trial exhibit as to the date and
manner of disclosure.

USE OF COURTROOM EQUIPMENT

All parties are expected to be familiar with the workings of the courtroom’s electronic
equipment. If there is a need to become familiar with this division’s electronic equipment, please
make an appointment through this Division’s Judicial Assistant, Stephanie Castrellon, at
[email protected], and this Division’s Bailiff, Jaime Ferniza,
[email protected], to test the equipment no later than one week prior to
the scheduled proceeding.

COMMUNICATION WITH DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 10

Preferred communication with this Division is via email to the judicial assistant,
Stephanie Castrellon, at [email protected]. For any and all such
written communication, all other parties to the case shall be endorsed. The phone number for this
division is (602) 506-8288.

TIME ESTIMATE FORM

Counsel shall consider the following in filling out the witness information form and
adjust the estimated time accordingly. Trial is held from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Mondays
through Thursdays. Each trial day is budgeted to be 4.5 hours of actual in court time,
exclusive of breaks and bench conferences. The Court reserves for itself 1 trial day for the
Court to do its portion of voir dire, read preliminary and final jury instructions, and for
jury deliberations. The parties will then be splitting the remaining time for each Party's
portion of voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing arguments. The
Court uses a timer to keep track of your time.

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT
1

2

3

4

5

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: ___________________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT
1

2

3

4

5

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: _________________________

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 11

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF(S)
DEFENDANT(S)
VOIR DIRE

OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: ________________________

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: _______________________

NOTE: If there are multiple parties on the same side who are represented by different
attorneys, then each party being represented by different attorneys shall fill out their own time
estimates.

10:30 a.m. Matter concludes.

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

The Arizona Constitution requires the Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance
Review to conduct performance evaluations of superior court judges. The Commission is asking
for your help to evaluate Maricopa County Superior Court judges currently undergoing
performance review. After your hearing, if the judge you are in front of is undergoing review, a
survey will be emailed to you and you can take the survey online. The survey is conducted by the
Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University and is anonymous and
confidential. Your participation in the review process is important! More information on Judicial
Performance Review can be found at www.azjudges.info.

La Constitución de Arizona exige que la Comisión de la Evaluación del Desempeño
Judicial realice evaluaciones de desempeño de los jueces de los tribunales superiores. La comisión
pide su ayuda para evaluar a los jueces del Tribunal Superior del Condado de Maricopa a quienes
actualmente se les está evaluando su desempeño. Después de su audiencia, si el juez ante el cual
comparece está sometido a una evaluación se le enviará por correo electrónico una encuesta que

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/11/2021

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 12

usted podrá tomar por Internet. La encuesta es realizada por el Docking Institute of Public Affairs
de la Fort Hays State University y se mantiene anónima y confidencial. ¡Su participación en el
proceso de la evaluación es importante! Para obtener más información sobre la evaluación del
desempeño judicial, diríjase a www.azjudges.info.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/17/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ANDREW J. RUSSELL
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

KELSEY DRESSEN
COMM. RUSSELL

BENCH TRIAL SET

Courtroom 108 - NE

10:00 a.m. This is the time set for telephonic Trial Setting Conference. Plaintiff Nancy
Berent is present with counsel, Kristin M Roebuck. Defendant Marta Mroczkowska and Miroslaw
Mroczkowska are represented by counsel, Debra S Brockway. Defendant Bell West Ranch
Homeowners Association Inc., is represented by counsel, Kelsey Dressen.

A record of the proceeding is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Court and counsel discuss the status of the case and scheduling matters.

IT IS ORDERED setting a 4-day Bench Trial on October 13-16, 2020 at 9:00 a.m.
before:

COMMISSIONER ANDREW J. RUSSELL
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING.

Please note that each day shall commence at 9:00 a.m. The lunch break will be taken at
12:00 p.m., with the afternoon session to begin promptly at 1:30 p.m. A fifteen (15) minute break
will be taken both mid-morning and mid-afternoon, with the trial day to end at 4:30 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all trial exhibits shall be submitted for marking not later
than October 6, 2020.

No information disclosed after the dates contained in the order may be used at the trial
absent court order on motion and affidavit.

IT IS ORDERED that should any discovery disputes arise, prior to filing discovery
motions, counsel shall MEET AND CONFER FACE TO FACE. If counsel are not able to resolve
the dispute,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any discovery motion must be accompanied by a Rule
37(2)(C) certification, to include that counsel have met face to face.

The proceedings will take place in the Superior Court’s new “e-courtroom.” A record of
the proceedings will be made by FTR in lieu of a court reporter. With this new technology, a court
reporter is not required and the parties are encouraged to experience the court's video recording
system before requesting a court reporter. If a court reporter is required, the Court must receive a
written request three (3) days prior to trial. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed
consent to proceed without a court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the
proceedings, the parties or counsel may request a CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a
CD is requested, please obtain a form from the Self Center to request a daily copy of a court hearing
or trial proceeding being conducted and pay the applicable fee. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay for
it.

If the parties are not familiar with the courtroom’s technology, they are encouraged to set
up an appointment with the court’s technology liaison at 602.372.7876.

10:12 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

PRETRIAL MANAGEMENT ORDERS

IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) in accordance with Rule 16(d),
A.R.Civ.P., is due in this division by 5:00 p.m. on September 15, 2020.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED with the JPTS, counsel shall deliver to this division, copies
of the following:

A.
A jointly completed time and witness estimate list.

B
Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, if a request has been or will be
filed. If no proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law is received, the request shall be
deemed waived.

C.
Whether or not the Rule of Exclusion of Witnesses has been invoked.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

All motions, other than motions in limine, shall be filed not later than ninety (90) days prior
to the date set for trial.

Notices of Settlement

In accordance with the provisions of ARCP 41(a), to be effective, any Notice of
Settlement or Dismissal providing for resolution of one or more pending claims that is filed
after service by the opposing party’s answer or dispositive motion, must be signed by each
affected party (or appropriate counsel) prosecuting or defending against the claim(s) covered
by the Notice. Each filed Notice shall state whether it resolves all pending issues in the case
and constitutes a representation to the Court that the claims subject to the Notice have been
fully resolved with respect to Notice signatories, and that the only further relief to be sought
with respect to such claims is entry of an order that each signatory confirms is consistent
with the agreement that gave rise to filing of the Notice.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

ATTACHED: SAMPLE FORMAT FOR TIME ESTIMATE FORM AND EXHIBIT
PROCEDURES

CAUSE NUMBER

CASE CAPTION

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL

DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL
(NOTE: Add additional lines as needed for additional parties and or witnesses.)

TIME ESTIMATES FOR TRIAL

Opening Statement and Closing Argument

PLAINTIFF'S OPENING STATEMENT

DEFENDANT'S OPENING

PLAINTIFF'S CLOSING

DEFENDANT'S CLOSING

PLAINTIFF'S REBUTTAL

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

PLAINITIFF'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

DEFENDANT'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

The foregoing are based on the best estimates of counsel of the time reasonably needed to complete
the necessary examination of the witnesses listed.

____________________________________
Counsel for Plaintiff
____________________________________
Counsel for Defendant

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL WHEN PREPARING EXHIBITS FOR USE IN COURT

COUNSEL PLEASE READ

Exhibits are due to the Court not later than by October 6, 2020

Exhibits will be marked consecutively, Plaintiff’s exhibits are marked first and then
Defendant’s exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a
later date. To avoid confusion during trial, it is essential that counsel avoid submitting duplicate
exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later date. Do
not list “Any and all exhibits listed by ….” Depositions will not be marked as an exhibit. Original
depositions to be used for impeachment purposes shall be provided to the clerk on the first day of
trial/hearing to be hand-filed by the clerk.

Each multiple page exhibit must be securely fastened together by staple or other
means. No rubber bands may be used. If Acco fasteners are used they must be long enough
to fasten securely.

Counsel are to provide a workable list of exhibits. The list should include a description of
each exhibit. (See blank sample of an exhibit table below as a reference.) Do not put numbers on
the exhibits; however a slip sheet with the exhibit number on it should be placed in front of each
exhibit.

Exhibit Description Information:

The descriptions should be verifiable when viewing the first page of the exhibit.

Letter designations such as 5A, 5B, etc. shall not be used.

No bates stamp references or number of pages in documents should be used.

If counsel are submitting large charts, blow-ups or maps, please include a small version
which can be marked as the exhibit and can go into the jury if in evidence. The blow-ups, charts
and/or maps can be used as demonstrative but will not be marked as exhibits and will be returned
to counsel.

For additional assistance in preparation of exhibits contact the courtroom clerk at 602-372-
7732.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/12/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6

Sample of List of Exhibits to be provided to the courtroom clerk:

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit
No.
Identified
By

Description

Legal Ground
for Objection

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/19/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/17/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has read and reviewed Plaintiff’s Nancy Berent’s Emergency Hearing Lawyer
We Retained for Trial Needs New Trial filed June 14, 2019. No response is necessary pursuant
to the March 8, 2019 minute entry. It is unclear to the Court what remedy Plaintiff’s seeks.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Nancy Berent’s Emergency Hearing Lawyer We
Retained for Trial Needs New Trial filed June 14, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/20/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/18/2019

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

Due to the unavailability of the court and on the court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Telephonic Trial Setting Conference set for July 16, 2019
and resetting same for July 26, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. (15 minutes allotted).

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/30/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

06/29/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
LORI N BROWN

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on City of Surprise’s Motion to Dismiss on
August 25, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. (30 minutes allotted) before:

Judge John R. Hannah
Northeast Regional Court
18380 N. 40th St., Courtroom 102
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0759

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court
reporter. Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/10/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/07/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTION - REJECTED

The Court has received and reviewed Nancy Berent’s May 3, 2023, Plaintiffs Proof of
Fraud Arbitration Pre-Hearing Deputy Clerk Reassigned to Judge Bachus Rule 73, 12/21/2021 No
Agreement Filed.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Nancy Berent’s May 3, 2023, Plaintiffs Proof of Fraud
Arbitration Pre-Hearing Deputy Clerk Reassigned to Judge Bachus Rule 73, 12/21/2021 No
Agreement Filed.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/10/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

UNDER ADVISEMENT RULING

The Court has read and considered:

 Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association’s Motion for Summary
Judgment, filed December 7, 2018 and the attachments and statement of facts.
 Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendant Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment,
filed February 1, 2019 and controverting statement of facts and exhibits.
 Defendant Bell Well Ranch Homeowners Association’s Reply to Plaintiffs’
Response to Motion for Summary Judgment, filed January 23, 2019.
AND
 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed December 7, 2018 and the
attachments and statement of facts.
 Defendant/Cross Defendant Bell West Ranch HOA’s Response to Plaintiffs’
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed December 17, 2018 and exhibits.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2

 Defendant Mroskowska’s (Corrected) Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment, filed January 22, 2019 and Separate and Controverting Facts
in Support of Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and
exhibits.
 Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
(Defendant Association), filed February 1, 2019.
 Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Defendant
Mroczkowskas), filed March 4, 2019.
 Plaintiff Michael Berent’s Legal Brief on Res Judicata Supplementing His
Response to the Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Supplement”),
filed May 31, 2019.
The Court has considered all of the filings and the oral argument presented on May 21,
2019 and has made the following findings and orders:

Brief Facts

Plaintiffs Michael and Nancy Berent (“Berents”) and Defendants Grazyna and March
Mroczkowska (“Mroczkowskas”) are neighbors in Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners
Association (“HOA”), a community within the boundaries of the City of Surprise. The Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions (“CC&Rs”) of the HOA specify that “all structures must be
constructed on the Property in accordance with any county or municipal zoning regulations
applicable to the property”. See CC&R §8.02. The parties agree that the CC&Rs constitute an
enforceable contract between the Plaintiffs and the HOA.

On July 5, 2015, the HOA approved, through its management company Vision
Management Company, an application from the Mroczkowskas to build a driveway extension on
their property. The application did not include the identification of a fire hydrant on the
Mroczkowskas’ property. The HOA approval letter stated that “the edge of the driveway can be
no closer than 13 inches from the property line (City Requirement)” and “You must also follow
all local building codes and setback requirements, if applicable”.

However, the City of Surprise requires the nearest edge of any driveway curb to be a
minimum of five (5) feet from the property line or any public utility, including a fire hydrant.
Ordinance Part II, Chapter 122, Article VII, Section 122-12(h)(3)(b). The ordinance further
requires that the driveway shall not comprise more than 30% of the front yard lot area of a detached
single family home”. Ordinance Part II, Chapter 122, Article VII, Section 122-12(h)(3)(c).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 3

The Mroczkowskas’ driveway extension is less than 36 inches from both the property line
and a fire hydrant. It is approximately 13 inches from the Berents’ property line and exceeds 30%
of the total area of the front yard.

Plaintiffs filed a claim with the Registrar of Contractors. An Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) concluded that the evidence did not support a finding that the HOA violated §8.02 or §8.06
of the CC&Rs.

The appeal of the ALJ decision was dismissed prior to the oral argument herein.

Defendant HOA’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment both address similar issues.

Defendant HOA Motion for Summary Judgment

Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint seeks claims for relief against the HOA for Breach
of Contract and Negligence arising out of the approval of the Mroczkowskas driveway and failure
to follow and/or enforce the CC&Rs.

Defendant HOA argues that:

1) The HOA did not breach the CC&Rs by approving a driveway that violated City of
Surprise Ordinances.
2) The HOA was not negligent.
3) The Berents’ claims are barred by res judicata.
4) The Mroczkowskas are not entitled to indemnification.
The parties agree that the legal standard regarding the HOA’s approval of the driveway is
“reasonableness”. See Tierra Ranchos H.O.A. v. Kitchukov, 216 Ariz. 195, 165 P.3d 173 (2007).
Tierra Ranchos makes clear that the question of reasonableness is a question of fact that is
generally left to the jury. To the extent that both Plaintiffs and the HOA seeks summary judgment
on the breach of contract issue, it is clear that the determination of a breach is dependent upon the
finding of material facts that are in dispute.

Plaintiffs’ contend that res judicata is inapplicable here because the finding of the
Administrative Law Judge was predicated on a “conclusion of law” that the driveway was not a
“structure” under the purview of the CC&Rs. They argue that this conclusion is in contradiction
to Horton v. Mitchell, 200 Ariz. 523, 527, 29 P.3d 870, 874 (App. 2001).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 4

For the reasons stated in Plaintiff’s Supplement, the Court finds that res judicata does not
preclude Plaintiff’s claims in the Third Amended Complaint.

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment

Plaintiffs contend that because the driveway violates two city ordinances, the Berents “de
facto” violated the CC&Rs. Plaintiffs assert that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law
that the CC&R violations constitute a breach of contract and therefore summary judgment should
be granted in their favor on that issue.

Plaintiffs further allege that the HOA breached the CC&Rs by approving the construction
of the Mroczkowskas driveway extension and failed to enforce §8.02 of the CC&Rs, (wherein
homeowners are required to abide by the City of Surprise ordinances), constituting a breach of
contract as a matter of law. The City of Surprise did not cite Plaintiffs after an investigation.

Based on the allegations of both parties, there are clearly issue of facts surrounding the
alleged violations of the City of Surprise ordinances.

“If the moving party on a motion has made a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of
material fact exists, the opponent of the motion has the burden to produce sufficient evidence that
there is indeed an issue.” W.J. Kroeger Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 112 Ariz. 285, 286 (1975). A
motion for summary judgment should not be denied simply on the speculation that some doubt,
scintilla of evidence, or dispute over irrelevant or immaterial facts might blossom into a
controversy in the middle of trial. Shaw v. Petersen, 169 Ariz. 559, 560-61 (App. 1991) quoting
Orme Sch., 166 Ariz. at 309. “The court does not try issues of fact, but only whether the same are
genuine and in good faith disputed. The mere general statement in a pleading, when attacked by
such motion supported by proof of specific facts in the form of affidavit or deposition, places on
the author of the statement the obligation to present something which will show that when the date
of trial arrives, he will have some proof to support the allegation in the pleading.” Stevens v.
Anderson, 75 Ariz. 331, 334 (1953).

“[A] party opposing a motion for summary judgment may not rest on the pleadings; it must
respond with specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial.” Kelly v. NationsBanc Mortg. Corp.,
199 Ariz. 284, 287 (App. 2000), citing Doe v. Roe, 191 Ariz. 313, 323 (1998). The opponents of
a motion for summary judgment do not raise a genuine issue of fact by merely stating in the record
that such an issue exists. Rather, they must show that competent evidence is available which will
justify a trial on the issue.” Flowers v. K-Mart Corp., 126 Ariz. 495, 499 (App. 1980). Determining
credibility, weighing the evidence, and drawing legitimate inferences from the facts are functions
for a jury, not the judge. Allstate Indem. Co. v. Ridgely, 214 Ariz. 440, 444 (App. 2007) (citations
omitted).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 5

On summary judgment, the court must view the evidence and all reasonable inferences that
such evidence will permit in the way that is most favorable to the party opposing summary
judgment and must assume the truth of that party’s allegations. Esplendido Apartments v. Olsson,
144 Ariz. 355, 361, 697 P.2d 1105, 1111 (App. 1985); Airfreight Express Ltd v. Evergreen Air
Center, Inc., 215 Ariz. 103, 106, ¶2, 158 P.3d 232, 235 (App. 2008). Taken in the light most
favorable to the respective party in each Motion,

THE COURT FINDS that there are genuine issues of material facts that preclude the
granting of the each motion for summary judgment. The issues include the determination of facts
surrounding the approval of the driveway and the reasonableness of the decisions made by the
HOA in regards to the CC&Rs. Specifically, was the HOA’s decision not to enforce the CC&Rs
reasonable in light of the City of Surprise failing to enforce the city ordinances at issue in the
CC&Rs.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners
Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 7, 2018.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment,
filed December 7, 2018.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/12/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/11/2024

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DANIELLE J. VIOLA
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN
JUDGE VIOLA

Plaintiff’s “Request Judge Julian Recuse Failure to Treat Pro Se Litigant Fair
Court of Appeals Response Evidence” - Denied

The Court received Plaintiff’s “Request Judge Julian Recuse Failure to Treat Pro Se
Litigant Fair Court of Appeals Response Evidence” filed June 20, 2024. The filing was forwarded
to the Civil Presiding Judge for a determination.

Rule 42.2 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a party seeking a change
of judge for cause must establish grounds by affidavit as required by A.R.S. § 12-409. Plaintiff
provided the required affidavit. The substance of Plaintiff’s complaint is that Plaintiff disagrees
with actions taken by the prior judge and the currently assigned judge.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/11/2024

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

While Plaintiff includes an affidavit in support of the Motion, the affidavit simply outlines
areas of disagreement with Judge Julian’s actions. Upon review, Plaintiff simply makes
conclusory allegations about the actions taken by the assigned judge. “A change of judge for cause
is not warranted if based merely on speculation, suspicion, apprehension, or imagination.” See
Stagecoach Trails MHC, LLC v. City of Benson, 232 Ariz. 562, 568 ¶21 (App. 2013); see also
United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563, 583 (1966) (“[T]o be disqualifying,” a judge’s
“alleged bias and prejudice…must stem from an extrajudicial source” and result in a decision “on
some basis other than what the judge learned from his participation in the case.”). To overcome
this presumption, a litigant must “set forth a specific basis for the claim of partiality and prove by
a preponderance of the evidence that the judge is biased or prejudiced.” State v. Cropper, 205 Ariz.
181, 185 (2003) (citation and internal quotations omitted). Plaintiff has failed to meet her burden.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s “Request Judge Julian Recuse Failure to Treat Pro
Se Litigant Fair Court of Appeals Response Evidence” filed June 20, 2024.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/19/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/16/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
THOMAS C HORNE

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has reviewed and considered Plaintiff Michael Berent’s Motion to Continue
Trial filed June 17, 2019. The Court has also received an email from defense counsel, Debra
Brockway, indicating that she has no objection to Plaintiff’s Motion.

IT IS ORDERED affirming the hearing set on July 26, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. but converting
it from a Final Trial Management Conference to a Telephonic Status Conference to reset trial
date (15 minutes allotted). Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. Mr. Horne’s office
shall initiate the telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of all other counsel on the
conference call and by calling this division at: (602) 506-5121 at least five minutes before the
scheduled time. The parties and counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences
via cell phones or speakerphone.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter
is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/16/2019

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

FILED: Email from Debra Brockway.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/24/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/22/2019

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has read and reviewed Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s Motion to Disqualify Ms.
Brockway Repeated Due Process Violations Tampering Tainting Trial Lawyer filed July 9, 2019.
No response is necessary pursuant to the Court’s March 8, 2019 minute entry.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s Motion to Disqualify Ms. Brockway
Repeated Due Process Violations Tampering Tainting Trial Lawyer filed July 9, 2019.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/30/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CYNTHIA J. BAILEY
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JUDGE BAILEY

JURY TRIAL RESET
FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SET
DEADLINES AND PROCEDURES

Northeast Regional Court - Courtroom 108

11:00 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff Michael Berent
is represented by counsel, Thomas C. Horne and Kristin M. Roebuck. Plaintiff Nancy Berent is
present on her own behalf. Defendants Marta Mroczkowski and Miroslaw Mroczkowski are
represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway. Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners
Association Inc. is represented by counsel, Kevin M. Arnold.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court clarifies that Mr. Horne and Ms. Roebuck will be representing Nancy Berent
and Michael Berent at trial.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff Michael Berent’s Motion to Continue Trial filed June
17, 2019 and vacating the Jury Trial set on August 5, 2019 in this division.

TRIAL SETTING

IT IS ORDERED resetting this matter for a 5-day Trial to a Jury on April 13-16 and
20, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. in this division before:

THE HONORABLE JUDGE CYNTHIA BAILEY
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-5121

Trial days are normally 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Thursday.

Counsel/parties shall make note that the Court reserves for itself one (1) day for the
purpose of jury selection and jury deliberations.

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING. Motions to continue based on lack of preparation
will ordinarily not be granted.

If counsel have any pre-existing conflicts with said trial date, they shall notify the Court,
in writing, within five (5) days from today's date.

All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant to Local
Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter is not
mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Requests for interpreters, court reporters or video conference must be made at least
fourteen (14) days prior to the trial/hearing date.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 3

Trial time will be divided between Plaintiff and Defendant. “When you are out of time,
you are out of words.”

JURY PANEL

A panel of 8 jurors shall decide this matter. The court, after input from the parties at the
Final Trial Management Conference, shall determine the number of required alternates. The court
intends to order a total panel of 35 jurors for jury selection. If either party believes that this would
be inadequate, the issue may be addressed at the Final Trial Management Conference.

One day’s jury fees will be assessed against the parties (evenly divided) unless the Court
is notified of settlement by 10:00 a.m. on the judicial day before trial. Counsel are reminded to
promptly notify the Court of any settlement pursuant to Rule 5.3(d). The preferred method of
communication is via e-mail marked “Urgent” directed to the Judicial Assistant, April Johnson, at
[email protected].

FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/ORAL ARGUMENT

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Final Trial Management Conference on March
13, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. (time allotted: 1 hour) in this division. Trial counsel shall appear in person
for the conference. Any self-represented party shall appear in person for the conference. This
minute entry order sets forth tasks that must be completed by trial counsel. Any party that is self-
represented is advised that all tasks imposed upon “counsel” in this minute entry Order apply to
self-represented litigants.

Oral Argument on any pretrial motions, including Motions in Limine, shall be conducted
at the time of the Final Trial Management Conference.

JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT

A Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) must be filed no later than March 6, 2020. In addition
to the materials required by Ariz.R.Civ.P. 16(f), counsel shall meet prior to the Final Trial
Management Conference in order to discuss and prepare the following, which shall be filed with
or included in the JPTS:

A.
Voir Dire: Proposed agreed-upon voir dire questions.

B.
Witnesses: Within the Joint Pretrial Statement, there shall be a list of all
witnesses each party intends to call at trial in the order in which the party

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 4

intends to call the witness, together with the estimated time needed for
direct, cross, and redirect examinations.

C.
Jury Instructions and Verdict Forms: A joint set of agreed-upon jury
instructions and verdict forms. Each party shall provide separate sets of any
requested instructions that have not been agreed upon. (Please review
Rosen v. Knaub, 175 Ariz. 329, 857 P.2d 381 (1993) before requesting non-
RAJI instructions.) Recommended Arizona Jury Instructions (please use the
most current version) need not be retyped, but may be listed by name and
number, such as: (a) RAJI Preliminary 1 -Duty of Jurors; (b) RAJI Standard
2 -Burden of Proof; (c) RAJI Negligence 1 -Violation of Statute.

NON-RAJI INSTRUCTIONS shall be typed in Word Format, numbered
consecutively, one per page, with legal authority in support of the
instruction. A CD of any non-RAJI instructions shall be provided to this
Division. (No CD is required for RAJI instructions.)

D.
Claims: A brief statement of the claims for inclusion in RAJI Preliminary
14 – Claims Made and Issues To Be Proved.

E.
Summary of Case: A stipulated brief summary of the case, to be read by
the court during voir dire.

F.
Deposition Transcripts: A list, by page and line numbers, of all deposition
or other transcribed testimony that may be offered at trial, other than for
impeachment, including designations of testimony that a party believes
ought in fairness to be introduced pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P. 32(a) together
with any testimony to be offered by an opposing/other party. The court
shall also be provided with copies of those parts of any such testimony to
which objection is made, indicating the testimony objected to and the
reasons for such objection. Any objection not so included is waived. Since
jurors generally prefer narrative summaries or brief excerpts of questions
and answers, the parties should confer and prepare agreed-upon summaries.
Counsel shall present original depositions for filing at the same time they
present exhibits. Original depositions are provided to the clerk for the record
and are not marked as exhibits.

G.
Exhibit List: A list of all marked exhibits containing a brief description of
each exhibit and any objections to such exhibits. Any objection not so
included is waived.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 5

H.
Expert Disclosures: Copies of all expert disclosures made pursuant to
Ariz.R.Civ.P. 26.1(a)(6).

I.
The number of jurors and alternates agreed on, whether the alternates may
deliberate and the number of jurors required to reach a verdict.

DUTIES AT THE FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Counsel who will try the case shall appear and be prepared to discuss and resolve:

A.
Allocation of trial time among the parties and, if appropriate, time limits for
voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing
arguments;

B.
Stipulations regarding witnesses testimony and the admission of exhibits;

C.
Jury instructions, juror notebooks, and verdict forms;

D.
Deposition summaries and excerpts from depositions including objections
thereto;

E.
Scheduling, equipment, or interpreter issues;

F.
Status of settlement negotiations;

G.
Motions in limine; and

H.
Other matters addressed in the JPTS.

DUTIES PRIOR TO TRIAL

In advance of the Final Trial Management Conference and/or Trial, the parties shall attend
to the following:

A. Discovery Disputes: If a discovery dispute needs judicial intervention, the parties
must first comply with the “meet and confer” provision of Rule 37. Absent resolution,
counsel for the movant shall email the Court’s Judicial Assistant, April Johnson, at
[email protected], and all other counsel to advise them of his/her
request for a telephonic hearing. Each party shall thereafter email the Court’s Judicial

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 6

Assistant a summary of the dispute in Times New Roman 13 point font, limited to no
more than two pages. The submitted written summary shall include the case number,
names of parties and name of party from whom the summary is submitted. All parties
shall be copied on the email. The emails will be filed with the Clerk. Once the Court
receives a summary from each party and a certification of compliance with Rule 37,
the Judicial Assistant will email the parties to schedule a telephonic conference with
the Judge. These are generally held within one to three business days.

B. Motions in Limine: The granting or denial of a motion in limine turns on whether the
admission of evidence reaches the level of reversible error or a mistrial. Said motions
must meet the test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 499 P.2d 152 (1972):
"The primary purpose of a motion in limine is to avoid disclosing to the jury
prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial." Motions in Limine are not granted
“except upon a clear showing of non-admissibility.” The parties shall not file motions
denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for summary
judgment.

1. Page Limit and Format: Neither the motion in limine nor the response
may exceed three pages, including the caption. Showing that the motion
has merit should not require more than that. Motions in limine shall be
consecutively numbered in the caption identifying the party filing it and the
subject of the motion; e.g. “Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 1 Re:
Insurance Agreement,” and shall deal with one discrete subject per motion.
Do not respond to more than one motion in limine in each response.

2. Substance: Any motion in limine or response to such a motion should
begin with a simple declarative sentence that identifies the evidence that is
the subject of the motion, with the understanding that the broader the scope
of the evidence to be excluded, the less likely it is that a motion in limine
will be granted. The remainder of the motion or response should then
explain why a mistrial or reversible error would or would not result if the
motion is denied, with citations to authority that have reached the same
conclusion in the same or similar circumstances (this also applies to motions
in limine based on any failure to disclose, keeping in mind that
nondisclosure implicates Ariz. R. Civ. P. 37(c)). If the motion is unable to
explain why its denial would result in a mistrial or reversible error, the
remainder should then demonstrate persuasively what efficiency, economy,
or other benefit is to be gained by granting the motion.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 7

3. Rule 7.2: Motions in limine shall be filed in accordance with
Ariz.R.Civ.P. 7.2. Prior to filing any motion in limine, the parties through
counsel must meet and confer to attempt to resolve issues to be raised by
such motions, and any motions in limine must include a certification that
counsel have so conferred.

4. Deadlines: The deadline for motions in limine is 30 days before the final
pretrial management conference. Responses must be filed no later than 15
days after service of the motion in limine. No replies should be filed, unless
requested and approved by the court.

5. Under Advisement: Although motions in limine will be considered as
quickly as the court’s schedule permits, they will not be taken under
advisement any sooner than 15 days before the start of the trial, regardless
of when they are filed. If the parties believe that a ruling on such a motion
early in the case will facilitate settlement, they should notify this division
(by telephone at (602) 506-5121 or e-mail to the judicial assistant) and every
effort will be made to decide the issue as soon as time allows.

C. Daubert Motions: The deadline for any motion brought for a Daubert hearing or
brought under Ariz.R.Evid. 702, is the same as the dispositive motion deadline.
Failure to file such a motion by this date shall constitute a waiver of (1) any objection
that the expert is not qualified to render expert testimony, and/or (2) any objection that
any opinion of the expert should be excluded under Ariz.R.Evid. 702.

D. Exhibits: The following procedure applies as to all exhibits sought to be utilized at
trial:

1. Due Date: Exhibits to be offered at trial shall be delivered to the division
clerk no later than March 30, 2020. If you have any questions regarding
the guidelines set forth below or procedures relating to exhibits, contact this
division’s clerk at (602) 372-7736.

2. Organization: Exhibits should be submitted to the Clerk separated by a
tabbed and numbered divider. Staple or otherwise secure each individual
exhibit so that pages do not become separated. If an exhibit is too heavy or
large for a hanging file folder, place it in a binder. Exhibits not securely
bound or bound with binder clips, paper clips, or rubber bands will not be
accepted.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 8

The list of exhibits should contain the case number and caption, the
scheduled trial date, the party submitting the exhibits, the exhibit number,
and a simple description of the exhibit. Keep the descriptions of the exhibits
simple. Do not use a description that cannot be verified by looking at the
document or item. Do not include Bates numbers in your description of the
exhibits.

Exhibits shall be marked numerically and consecutively beginning with
Plaintiff’s exhibits and continuing sequentially with Defendant’s exhibits
(e.g. Plaintiff’s exhibits 1, 2, 3, Defendant’s exhibits 4, 5, 6). Do not skip
numbers. Numbers will not be skipped or saved in anticipation of
additional exhibits not yet submitted. Any missing or skipped exhibits shall
be designated as “Unused.” Additional exhibits, if necessary, may be
marked during the course of trial, although the parties are discouraged from
waiting until trial to mark additional exhibits.

Counsel shall eliminate duplication of exhibits; duplicate exhibits will not
be marked. If duplicate exhibits exist and they are removed by the Clerk
and not marked, the Court’s numbering will not be consistent with the
numbering counsel provided. Counsel shall, therefore, confer regarding
exhibits to ensure that there are no duplicates.

3. Use of Depositions: Depositions should not be listed on the exhibit
description list because depositions are not marked as exhibits. Original
depositions shall be provided to the Clerk at the time of trial for filing
directly into the court record. Counsel shall retain a copy of the depositions
for their use during the trial. The original depositions remain with the Clerk
to be used as reference by the trial judge during testimony.

4. Demonstrative Evidence: Poster boards and large items may only be used
for demonstrative purposes. Counsel shall advise opposing/other counsel of
any demonstrative poster boards or other items at least three (3) judicial
days prior to trial. Counsel may bring poster boards and large items to court
to use during trial. However, if counsel intends any poster boards or large
items marked as an exhibit, they must provide the clerk with an 8-1/2 x 11
photograph/copy of the item and include the photograph/copy in the
submitted list of exhibits.

5. Failure to Comply: If a party fails to comply with the terms set forth about,
it may result in that party’s exhibit(s) being precluded at trial.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 9

6. Disclosure Objections: If an objection is made at trial relating to untimely
or non-disclosure, the burden is on the proponent of the evidence to
establish that disclosure was properly made. The parties are strongly
encouraged to create their own log for each trial exhibit as to the date and
manner of disclosure.

USE OF COURTROOM EQUIPMENT

All parties are expected to be familiar with the workings of the courtroom’s electronic
equipment. If there is a need to becoming familiar this division’s electronic equipment, please
make an appointment through this division’s judicial assistant, April Johnson, via email at
[email protected], to test the equipment by no later than one week prior to
the scheduled proceeding.

COMMUNICATION WITH DIVISION

Preferred communication with this division is via email to the judicial assistant, April
Johnson, at [email protected]. For any and all such written communication,
all other parties to the case shall be endorsed. The phone number for this division is (602) 506-
5121.

TIME ESTIMATE FORM

Counsel shall consider the following in filling out the witness information form and
adjust the estimated time accordingly. Trial is held from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Mondays
through Thursdays. Each trial day is budgeted to be 6 hours of actual in court time, exclusive
of breaks and bench conferences. The Court reserves for itself 6 hours for the Court to do
its portion of voir dire, read preliminary and final jury instructions, and for jury
deliberations. The parties will then be splitting the remaining time for each party's portion
of voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing arguments. The Court
uses a timer to keep track of your time. When you are out of time, you are out of words.

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT
1

2

3

4

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

07/26/2019

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 10

5

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: ___________________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT
1

2

3

4

5

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: _________________________

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF(S)
DEFENDANT(S)
VOIR DIRE

OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: ________________________

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: _______________________

NOTE: if there are multiple parties on the same side who are represented by different
attorneys, then each party being represented by different attorneys shall fill out his/her own time
estimates.

11:14 a.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/12/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/11/2020

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ANDREW J. RUSSELL
G. Chavez

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. RUSSELL

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff Nancy Berent’s Motion to Vacate Bench Trial and Set
Jury Trial, filed July 9, 2020.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Status Conference on August 28, 2020, at 11:00 a.m. (15
minutes allotted) before Commissioner Andrew Russell to discuss rescheduling the Bench Trial
to a Jury Trial. This conference/hearing shall be conducted using the GoToMeeting application.
Information regarding access to Commissioner Andrew Russell’s virtual courtroom is listed
below.

Commissioner Russell's Virtual Court Room:
Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/392639165

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/11/2020

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

You can also dial in using your phone. United States: +1 (872) 240-3212 Access Code:
392-639-165

New to GoToMeeting? Get the app now and be ready when your first meeting starts:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/install/392639165

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/29/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/25/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
LORI N BROWN

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

RULING

Courtroom 102 - NE

9:05 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Defendant City of Surprise’s Motion
to Dismiss. Plaintiffs Michael Berent and Nancy Berent are represented by counsel, Lori N.
Brown. Defendants Grazyna and Marta Mroczkowska and Miroslaw Mroczkowski are
represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway. Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners
Association, Inc. is represented by counsel, Maria R. Kupillas. Defendant City of Surprise is
represented by counsel, Jeffrey T. Murray.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Arguments are heard.

IT IS ORDERED Defendant City of Surprise’s Motion to Dismiss is granted for the
following reasons: (1) the notice of claim was not timely submitted, and (2) the City has no
mandatory duty to enforce this ordinance.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/25/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court does not reach the question today of whether plaintiffs are among the specific
individuals protected by this ordinance.

9:34 a.m. Hearing concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/04/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ANDREW J. RUSSELL
A. Wood

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. RUSSELL

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108-NER

11:02 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Status Conference re: Plaintiff Nancy
Berent’s Motion to Vacate Bench Trial and Set Jury Trial filed July 9, 2020. Plaintiff Nancy
Berent is present with counsel, Jonathan A Dessaules. Defendant Marta Mroczkowska is
represented by counsel, Debra S Brockway. Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners
Association Inc. is represented by counsel, Kevin M Arnold.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for a 6-day Trial to a Jury on July 19, 20, 21, 22,
26, and 27, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. in this division before:

THE HONORABLE ANDREW J. RUSSELL
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-5121

Trial days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Thursday.

Counsel/parties shall make note that the Court reserves for itself one (1) day for the
purpose of jury selection and jury deliberations.

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING. Motions to continue based on lack of preparation
will ordinarily not be granted.

If counsel have any pre-existing conflicts with said trial date, they shall notify the Court,
in writing, within five (5) days from today's date.

All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant to Local
Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a court reporter is not
mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must submit a written request to the
assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The
fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Requests for interpreters, court reporters or video conference must be made at least
fourteen (14) days prior to the trial/hearing date.

Trial time will be divided between Plaintiff(s) and Defendant(s).

JURY PANEL

A panel of 8 jurors shall decide this matter. The Court, after input from the parties at the
Final Trial Management Conference, shall determine the number of required alternates. The Court

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

intends to order a total panel of 35 jurors for jury selection. If either party believes that this would
be inadequate, the issue may be addressed at the Final Trial Management Conference.

One day’s jury fees will be assessed against the parties (evenly divided) unless the Court
is notified of settlement by 10:00 a.m. on the judicial day before trial. Counsel are reminded to
promptly notify the Court of any settlement pursuant to Rule 5.3(d). The preferred method of
communication is via e-mail marked “Urgent” directed to the Judicial Assistant, Sophia Ramirez,
at [email protected].

FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/ORAL ARGUMENT

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Final Trial Management Conference on June
18, 2021, at 9:30 a.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes) in this division. Trial counsel shall appear in
person for the conference. Any self-represented party shall appear in person for the conference.
This minute entry order sets forth tasks that must be completed by trial counsel. Any party that is
self-represented is advised that all tasks imposed upon “counsel” in this minute entry Order apply
to self-represented litigants.

Oral Argument on any pretrial motions, including Motions in Limine, shall be conducted
at the time of the Final Trial Management Conference.

JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT

A Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) must be filed no later than June 11, 2021. In addition
to the materials required by Ariz.R.Civ.P. 16(f), counsel shall meet prior to the Final Trial
Management Conference in order to discuss and prepare the following, which shall be filed with
or included in the JPTS:

A.
Voir Dire: Proposed agreed-upon voir dire questions.

B.
Witnesses: Within the Joint Pretrial Statement, there shall be a list of all
witnesses each party intends to call at trial in the order in which the party
intends to call the witness, together with the estimated time needed for
direct, cross, and redirect examinations.

C.
Jury Instructions and Verdict Forms: A joint set of agreed-upon jury
instructions and verdict forms. Each party shall provide separate sets of any
requested instructions that have not been agreed upon. (Please review
Rosen v. Knaub, 175 Ariz. 329, 857 P.2d 381 (1993) before requesting non-
RAJI instructions.) Recommended Arizona Jury Instructions (please use the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

most current version) need not be retyped, but may be listed by name and
number, such as: (a) RAJI Preliminary 1 -Duty of Jurors; (b) RAJI Standard
2 -Burden of Proof; (c) RAJI Negligence 1 -Violation of Statute.
NON-RAJI INSTRUCTIONS shall be typed in Word Format, numbered
consecutively, one per page, with legal authority in support of the
instruction. A CD of any non-RAJI instructions shall be provided to this
Division. (No CD is required for RAJI instructions.)

D.
Claims: A brief statement of the claims for inclusion in RAJI Preliminary
14 – Claims Made and Issues to Be Proved.

E.
Summary of Case: A stipulated brief summary of the case, to be read by
the court during voir dire.

F.
Deposition Transcripts: A list, by page and line numbers, of all deposition
or other transcribed testimony that may be offered at trial, other than for
impeachment, including designations of testimony that a party believes
ought in fairness to be introduced pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P. 32(a) together
with any testimony to be offered by an opposing/other party. The court
shall also be provided with copies of those parts of any such testimony to
which objection is made, indicating the testimony objected to and the
reasons for such objection. Any objection not so included is waived. Since
jurors generally prefer narrative summaries or brief excerpts of questions
and answers, the parties should confer and prepare agreed-upon summaries.
Counsel shall present original depositions for filing at the same time they
present exhibits. Original depositions are provided to the clerk for the record
and are not marked as exhibits.

G.
Exhibit List: A list of all marked exhibits containing a brief description of
each exhibit and any objections to such exhibits. Any objection not so
included is waived.

H.
Expert Disclosures: Copies of all expert disclosures made pursuant to
Ariz.R.Civ.P. 26.1(a)(6).

I.
The number of jurors and alternates agreed on, whether the alternates may
deliberate and the number of jurors required to reach a verdict.

DUTIES AT THE FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

Counsel who will try the case shall appear and be prepared to discuss and resolve:

A.
Allocation of trial time among the parties and, if appropriate, time limits for
voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing
arguments;

B.
Stipulations regarding witnesses testimony and the admission of exhibits;

C.
Jury instructions, juror notebooks, and verdict forms;

D.
Deposition summaries and excerpts from depositions including objections
thereto;

E.
Scheduling, equipment, or interpreter issues;

F.
Status of settlement negotiations;

G.
Motions in limine; and

H.
Other matters addressed in the JPTS.

DUTIES PRIOR TO TRIAL

In advance of the Final Trial Management Conference and/or Trial, the parties shall attend
to the following:

A. Discovery Disputes: If a discovery dispute needs judicial intervention, the parties
must first comply with the “meet and confer” provision of Rule 37. Absent resolution,
counsel for the movant shall email the Court’s Judicial Assistant, Sophia Ramirez, at
[email protected], and all other counsel to advise them of
his/her request for a telephonic hearing. Each party shall thereafter email the Court’s
Judicial Assistant a summary of the dispute in Times New Roman 13 point font,
limited to no more than two pages. The submitted written summary shall include the
case number, names of parties and name of party from whom the summary is
submitted. All parties shall be copied on the email. The emails will be filed with the
Clerk. Once the Court receives a summary from each party and a certification of
compliance with Rule 37, the Judicial Assistant will email the parties to schedule a
telephonic conference with the Judge. These are generally held within one to three
business days.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6

B. Motions in Limine: The granting or denial of a motion in limine turns on whether the
admission of evidence reaches the level of reversible error or a mistrial. Said motions
must meet the test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 499 P.2d 152 (1972):
"The primary purpose of a motion in limine is to avoid disclosing to the jury
prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial." Motions in Limine are not granted
“except upon a clear showing of non-admissibility.” The parties shall not file motions
denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for summary
judgment.

1. Page Limit and Format: Neither the motion in limine nor the response
may exceed three pages, including the caption. Showing that the motion
has merit should not require more than that. Motions in limine shall be
consecutively numbered in the caption identifying the party filing it and the
subject of the motion; e.g. “Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 1 Re:
Insurance Agreement,” and shall deal with one discrete subject per motion.
Do not respond to more than one motion in limine in each response.

2. Substance: Any motion in limine or response to such a motion should
begin with a simple declarative sentence that identifies the evidence that is
the subject of the motion, with the understanding that the broader the scope
of the evidence to be excluded, the less likely it is that a motion in limine
will be granted. The remainder of the motion or response should then
explain why a mistrial or reversible error would or would not result if the
motion is denied, with citations to authority that have reached the same
conclusion in the same or similar circumstances (this also applies to motions
in limine based on any failure to disclose, keeping in mind that
nondisclosure implicates Ariz. R. Civ. P. 37(c)). If the motion is unable to
explain why its denial would result in a mistrial or reversible error, the
remainder should then demonstrate persuasively what efficiency, economy,
or other benefit is to be gained by granting the motion.

3. Rule 7.2: Motions in limine shall be filed in accordance with
Ariz.R.Civ.P. 7.2. Prior to filing any motion in limine, the parties through
counsel must meet and confer to attempt to resolve issues to be raised by
such motions, and any motions in limine must include a certification that
counsel have so conferred.

4. Deadlines: The deadline for motions in limine is 30 days before the final
pretrial management conference. Responses must be filed no later than 15

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7

days after service of the motion in limine. No replies should be filed, unless
requested and approved by the court.

5. Under Advisement: Although motions in limine will be considered as
quickly as the court’s schedule permits, they will not be taken under
advisement any sooner than 15 days before the start of the trial, regardless
of when they are filed. If the parties believe that a ruling on such a motion
early in the case will facilitate settlement, they should notify this division
(by telephone at (602) 506-5121 or e-mail to the judicial assistant) and every
effort will be made to decide the issue as soon as time allows.

C. Daubert Motions: The deadline for any motion brought for a Daubert hearing or
brought under Ariz.R.Evid. 702, is the same as the dispositive motion deadline.
Failure to file such a motion by this date shall constitute a waiver of (1) any objection
that the expert is not qualified to render expert testimony, and/or (2) any objection that
any opinion of the expert should be excluded under Ariz.R.Evid. 702.

D. Exhibits: The following procedure applies as to all exhibits sought to be utilized at
trial:

1. Due Date: Exhibits to be offered at trial shall be delivered to the division
clerk no later than July 7, 2021.

2. Organization: Exhibits should be submitted to the Clerk separated by a
tabbed and numbered divider. Staple or otherwise secure each individual
exhibit so that pages do not become separated. If an exhibit is too heavy or
large for a hanging file folder, place it in a binder. Exhibits not securely
bound or bound with binder clips, paper clips, or rubber bands will not be
accepted.

The list of exhibits should contain the case number and caption, the
scheduled trial date, the party submitting the exhibits, the exhibit number,
and a simple description of the exhibit. Keep the descriptions of the exhibits
simple. Do not use a description that cannot be verified by looking at the
document or item. Do not include Bates numbers in your description of the
exhibits.

Exhibits shall be marked numerically and consecutively beginning with
Plaintiff’s exhibits and continuing sequentially with Defendant’s exhibits
(e.g. Plaintiff’s exhibits 1, 2, 3, Defendant’s exhibits 4, 5, 6). Do not skip

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 8

numbers. Numbers will not be skipped or saved in anticipation of
additional exhibits not yet submitted. Any missing or skipped exhibits shall
be designated as “Unused.” Additional exhibits, if necessary, may be
marked during the course of trial, although the parties are discouraged from
waiting until trial to mark additional exhibits.

Counsel shall eliminate duplication of exhibits; duplicate exhibits will not
be marked. If duplicate exhibits exist and they are removed by the Clerk
and not marked, the Court’s numbering will not be consistent with the
numbering counsel provided. Counsel shall, therefore, confer regarding
exhibits to ensure that there are no duplicates.

3. Use of Depositions: Depositions should not be listed on the exhibit
description list because depositions are not marked as exhibits. Original
depositions shall be provided to the Clerk at the time of trial for filing
directly into the court record. Counsel shall retain a copy of the depositions
for their use during the trial. The original depositions remain with the Clerk
to be used as reference by the trial judge during testimony.

4. Demonstrative Evidence: Poster boards and large items may only be used
for demonstrative purposes. Counsel shall advise opposing/other counsel of
any demonstrative poster boards or other items at least three (3) judicial
days prior to trial. Counsel may bring poster boards and large items to court
to use during trial. However, if counsel intends any poster boards or large
items marked as an exhibit, they must provide the clerk with an 8-1/2 x 11
photograph/copy of the item and include the photograph/copy in the
submitted list of exhibits.

5. Failure to Comply: If a party fails to comply with the terms set forth about,
it may result in that party’s exhibit(s) being precluded at trial.

6. Disclosure Objections: If an objection is made at trial relating to untimely
or non-disclosure, the burden is on the proponent of the evidence to
establish that disclosure was properly made. The parties are strongly
encouraged to create their own log for each trial exhibit as to the date and
manner of disclosure.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 9

USE OF COURTROOM EQUIPMENT

All parties are expected to be familiar with the workings of the courtroom’s electronic
equipment. If there is a need to become familiar with this division’s electronic equipment, please
make an appointment through this division’s Judicial Assistant, Sophia Ramirez, via email at
[email protected], to test the equipment by no later than one week prior
to the scheduled proceeding.

COMMUNICATION WITH DIVISION

Preferred communication with this division is via email to the judicial assistant, Sophia
Ramirez, at [email protected]. For any and all such written
communication, all other parties to the case shall be endorsed. The phone number for this division
is (602) 506-5121.

TIME ESTIMATE FORM

Counsel shall consider the following in filling out the witness information form and
adjust the estimated time accordingly. Trial is held from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Mondays
through Thursdays. Each trial day is budgeted to be 4.5 hours of actual in court time,
exclusive of breaks and bench conferences. The Court reserves for itself 1 trial day for the
Court to do its portion of voir dire, read preliminary and final jury instructions, and for jury
deliberations. The parties will then be splitting the remaining time for each party's portion
of voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations, and closing arguments. The Court
uses a timer to keep track of your time.

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT
1

2

3

4

5

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: ___________________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT:

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

08/28/2020

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 10

1

2

3

4

5

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: _________________________

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF(S)
DEFENDANT(S)
VOIR DIRE

OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: ________________________

DEFENDANT’S TOTAL TIME ESTIMATE: _______________________

NOTE: if there are multiple parties on the same side who are represented by different
attorneys, then each party being represented by different attorneys shall fill out his/her own time
estimates.

11:16 a.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/08/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

09/07/2022

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE JULIAN

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s June 27, 2022 Show Cause Order to
Produce Waiver of Signed Agreement for Binding Arbit. Plaintiffs Never Signed Agreement.

The Court cannot consider the foregoing submission, because it is not a proper motion or
pleading. Should Plaintiff wish the issues raised in his submission to be addressed by the Court,
he must file a proper pleading or motion. Available forms may be obtained at the Clerk of Court’s
Law
Library
Resource
Center
locations,
or
online
at
the
following
address:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/LawLibraryResourceCenter/

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/08/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

09/07/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE JULIAN

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s June 22, 2022 Motion to Set Aside a
Judgment Due to Bring Denied a Necessary Medical Continuance by Defendants.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s June 22, 2022 Motion to Set Aside a Judgment Due
to Bring Denied a Necessary Medical Continuance by Defendants.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/23/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

09/20/2024

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
Y. Rodriguez

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTIONS REJECTED

The Court reviewed and considered Plaintiff, Nancy Berent’s documents entitled “Motion
to Vacate ASC Mandate Motion to Vacate Fraud Arbitration Motion for Summary Judgment
Provisional Remedy”, filed September 9, 2024; “Emergency Request Mandatory Injunctive
Relief Removal of Prohibited Paving at MROCZKOWSKA Property”, “Complaint and Request
for Permanent Injunction Surprise, Arizona 85374 Remove Prohibited Paving in Violation of
Deed Book Page”, both filed September 11, 2024,

This matter has concluded, and these filings are not proper motions or pleadings.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED rejecting all of Nancy Berent’s motions listed above.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/29/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

09/24/2021

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108 – Northeast Region

10:30 a.m. This is the time set for a Trial Planning Conference via Court Connect.
Plaintiff Nancy Berent is represented by counsel, Jonathan A. Dessaules. Defendant/Cross
Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc., is represented by counsel, Kelsey
Dressen on behalf of Kevin M. Arnold. Defendant/Crossclaimant Marta Mroczkowska is present
and represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

09/24/2021

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Over the objection of Defendant/Cross Claimant,

IT IS ORDERED affirming the 6-Day Trial to a Jury set to begin on November 2, 2021
at 9:00 a.m. in this division before:

THE HONORABLE SARA AGNE
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-8288

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming the Final Trial Management Conference set on
October 22, 2021 at 10:15 a.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes) via Court Connect:

Please join the hearing via:
https://tinyurl.com/Courtroom108

You can also dial in using your phone.
Phone: +1 917-781-4590 and Conference ID: 929 847 029#

Use of the above link can be made easier by downloading the Microsoft Teams application first;
for more on the new platform, including an introduction video and participant guide, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect

10:39 a.m. Matter concludes.

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/11/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

On the Court’s own motion due to a scheduling conflict,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the April 12, 2019 Final Trial Management Conference and
resetting same for April 3, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. (90 minutes allotted) before:

The Honorable Judge Theodore Campagnolo
Superior Court of Arizona
Northeast Regional Court Center
18380 North 40th Street
Courtroom 102
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0537

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2

Counsel please make note of the deadlines for exhibits, joint pretrial statement, and other
documents have been changed. See below.
COUNSEL WHO WILL BE THE LEAD TRIAL ATTORNEYS ON THE CASE
AND IF THE PARTIES ARE PRO PER, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE IN COURT FOR THE
FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE.

If the parties are not familiar with the courtroom’s technology, they are encouraged to set
up an appointment with the court’s technology liaison at 602.372.7876.

PLEASE NOTE:

 Trial hours and days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (with a lunch recess from
11:45 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. and two 15-minute recesses, daily), Monday through
Thursday (unless otherwise ordered by the Court).
 All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court reporter. Pursuant
to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in which a
court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial
days in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the
Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a
half-day and $280 for a full day.
 This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and other Court requested
filings in this case must be submitted individually. Counsel shall not combine any
motion with a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed separately and
designated as such. No pleadings will be accepted if filed in combination with
another.
 A proposed order/judgment must be attached any motion requesting the court to do
something. Orders must be submitted in Word Format using the proper turbo
court code. All stipulations, joint scheduling reports, unopposed motions, etc.,
MUST contain a proposed order.
 The parties are encouraged to view Judge Campagnolo’s online profile for
additional information on the Court’s expectations regarding motion practices and
requirements, discovery disputes, and hearing/trial procedures at the following
website:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/JudicialBiographies/judges/profile.asp?jd
gID=327&jdgUSID=12118

DUTIES BEFORE THE FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 3

MOTIONS IN LIMINE. Motions in limine shall be filed only in accordance with Rule
7.2, ARCP. Motions in limine shall be filed thirty (30) days before the FTMC; any responses to a
motion in limine shall be filed no later than ten (10) days thereafter. Said motions must meet the
test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 397, 499 P.2d 152 (1972). If the Court wishes to
hear argument, the argument will be heard at the FTMC. No replies shall be filed.
Unless prior written leave of Court is obtained for good cause shown, no party may
file more than three (3) motions in limine, including all subparts. The parties shall not file
motions denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for summary
judgment.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS All motions, other than motions in limine, shall be filed as
per the deadlines in the Joint Scheduling Order unless otherwise ordered by the court.

JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT. The parties shall file with the court no later than
March 21, 2019 (10 days before the Final Trial Management Conference), a Joint Pretrial
Statement, signed by all counsel (and any self-represented party) and containing the following:

1.
List of Claims. The Joint Pretrial Statement must contain a list of all claims or causes
of action on which a verdict is sought by any party. Such list shall specify (1) the cause of action
(e.g., breach of contract, negligence, etc.), (2) each party asserting that cause of action, and (3) each
party against whom that cause of action is asserted.

2
No List of Issues. The requirements of Ariz. R. Civ. P. 16(g)(2)(A), (B) and (C) are
waived. The parties need not prepare a list of stipulations, agreed contested issues or other issues
considered material. Disputes over what issues are properly in the case will be decided under Rule
26.1. The parties may, if they wish, submit one or more separate stipulations regarding facts, evidence
or other matters.

3.
Summary of the Case for Jury Selection. The Joint Pretrial Statement must include
an agreed-upon brief (generally less than 200 words) summary of the case for jury selection purposes.
If the parties cannot agree, they must submit separate proposed summaries.

4.
Final Trial Witnesses. The Joint Pretrial Statement must include a Final Trial
Witness List, which must list each witness a party expects to call at trial (in person or by deposition),
the day on which they expect to call that witness and the estimated testimony time of witnesses. If
the court finds that a party unreasonably included witnesses not likely to be called at trial, it may
consider appropriate sanctions.

5.
Trial Exhibits. As required by Rule 16(g)(E), all trial exhibits must be listed in the
Joint Pretrial Statement along with objections. The court typically resolves objections to exhibits at

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 4

trial, but objections must be listed in the Joint Pretrial Statement to be preserved. If the court finds
that a party unreasonably included exhibits not likely to be used at trial, it may consider appropriate
sanctions.

6.
Deposition Designations. Deposition designations and objections should not be
included in the Joint Pretrial Statement. Deposition designations must be submitted to the Court at
the same time the Joint Pretrial Statement is due. The court will resolve deposition designations as
follows. Counsel must provide the court a hard copy of the deposition transcript with (1) the portions
to be read highlighted, (2) any counter-designations highlighted in a different color, and (3) any
objections written in the margin. If the party plans to play a video deposition, the transcript must be
provided by 4:00 p.m. two days before the deposition will be played.

7.
Other Matters. The Joint Pretrial Statement must include the matters in Ariz. R. Civ.
P. 16(g)(2)(H), (I), (J) and (K).

JURY INSTRUCTIONS; VOIR DIRE The parties shall meet and agree on as many
proposed jury instructions as possible. At the time of the filing of the joint pretrial statement, the
parties shall file and are required to provide the Court with a (CD), in word format, and a sanitized
copy of:

1.
An agreed-upon set of proposed preliminary and final jury instructions (All case
citations and RAJI references removed from the draft); and

2.
Proposed verdict forms, and voir dire questions and any additional jury
instructions.

3.
In the event that the parties disagree on a particular jury instruction, both parties’
proposed jury instruction shall be included in the draft proposed jury instructions with the
notation “Disputed” in the name of the instruction.

Jury instructions not requested by the final trial management conference will be deemed
waived unless good cause exists for the untimely request.

SETTLEMENT. The parties are reminded to promptly notify the court of any settlement
pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 5.3(d). One day’s jury fees will be assessed unless the court is notified of
settlement before 2:00 p.m. on the judicial day before the trial.

TIME ESTIMATES FOR TRIAL. Time Estimates for Trial attached hereto shall be
submitted on the same date as the parties’ Joint Pretrial Statement as ordered herein.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 5

In the event evidence or testimony is objected to on the basis of non-disclosure, the parties
should be prepared at trial to demonstrate compliance or non-compliance with Rule 26.1. This is
usually done by showing the court disclosure statements, so those must be available in the
courtroom.

TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

At the final trial management conference, the parties shall be prepared to discuss:

1.
The claims and parties as to which a verdict is sought.

2.
The time designated for trial and, if necessary, time limits.

3.
Any scheduling or equipment issues.

4.
Voir dire.

5.
Any special issues regarding exhibits or deposition designations.

6.
Preliminary jury instructions.

7.
The case summary for jury selection purposes.

8.
Motions in limine.

9.
The potential for settlement before trial.

TRIAL EXHIBITS

Counsel (and any self-represented party) shall deliver all trial exhibits to the courtroom
clerk (602-372-7726) at the time of the Final Trial Management Conference.

The parties shall present all exhibits to be used at trial, along with a written list with a brief
description of each exhibit, (bank statement, article, letter, email, etc..) to the clerk on the date
referenced above unless other arrangements have been made with the clerk before that date. All
exhibits will be clearly labeled by the parties to correspond with the list provided. If the following
procedures are not complied with, exhibits may be rejected.

1. Exhibits will be marked consecutively Plaintiff first and then Defendant;
2. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later
date;
3. To avoid confusion during trial, it is essential that counsel avoid submitting
duplicate exhibits;
4. Letter designations such as 5A, 5B, etc. shall not be used;
5. A colored sheet shall be placed between each exhibit with the exhibit number
clearly marked on each colored paper; (if you are submitting exhibits in a binder,
no color paper is needed, just tabbed numbers)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 6

6. Depositions will not be marked as an exhibit. Original depositions to be used for
impeachment purposes shall be provided to the clerk on the first day of trial/hearing
to be hand-filed by the clerk.
7. ****Each multiple page exhibit must be securely fastened together by staple or
other means. (unless you are submitting exhibits in a binder) NO
PAPERCLIPS may be used. If Acco fasteners are used they must be long enough
to fasten securely.****

If a party is submitting more than 100 exhibits, exhibits shall be submitted in three-
ring, binders with numbered tabs.

PLEASE BE DO NOT OVERFILL THE BINDERS, AS THE RINGS CANNOT SUPPORT A
FULL BINDER AND YOU MAY BE ASKED TO ASSIST THE CLERK IN PLACING THE
EXHIBITS INTO ADDITIONAL BINDERS THAT WILL BE PROVIDED BY COUNSEL OR
PARTIES.

If counsel are submitting large charts, blow-ups or maps, please include a small version
which can be marked as the exhibit and can go into the jury if in evidence.

For additional assistance in preparation of exhibits contact the courtroom clerk at 602-372-
7726.

TIME ESTIMATES FOR TRIAL
Opening Statement and Closing Argument

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

PLAINTIFF’S
WITNESS
IN PERSON
OR BY
DEPOSITION
DATE IF
TESTIMONY
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION
TOTAL
TIME FOR
WITNESS

PLAINTIFF'S OPENING STATEMENT

DEFENDANT'S OPENING

PLAINTIFF'S CLOSING

DEFENDANT'S CLOSING

PLAINTIFF'S REBUTTAL

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2018

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 7

DEFENDANT’S
WITNESS
IN PERSON
OR BY
DEPOSITION
DATE IF
TESTIMONY
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION
TOTAL
TIME FOR
WITNESS

The foregoing are based on the best estimates of counsel of the time reasonably needed to
complete the necessary examination of the witnesses listed.

____________________________________
Counsel for Plaintiff
___________________________________
Counsel for Defendant

Sample of List of Exhibits to be provided to the courtroom clerk:

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit
No.
Identi-
fied By

Description
Stipulated in
Evidence/
Objection

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/10/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2025

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PAMELA GATES
K. Johanson

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY P BROPHY
JUDGE GATES
JUDGE JULIAN

MINUTE ENTRY

Nancy Berent directed two pleadings to the office of the presiding judge. The first is a
pleading captioned, “Notice that Motion for Emergency Injunction Sent to Presiding Judge Has
Not Been Delivered by UPS Tracking.” The second is a pleading captioned, “Notice and Request
for Protection from Sanctions or Adverse Action USPS Lost Judges Motions Mailed to Her.” Ms.
Berent’s pleadings appear to assert concerns regarding the arbitration that was the subject of a
decision by the trial court and the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals previously decided that Ms. Berent agreed to resolve her dispute
through binding arbitration. The arbitrator denied Ms. Berent’s request to continue the arbitration.
Ms. Berent failed to appear for the arbitration, and the arbitrator concluded that the defendants

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/08/2025

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

prevailed on all claims. On April 4, 2022, the arbitrator entered the award in favor of defendants.
Two days later, Ms. Berent moved to vacate the award, which the superior court denied. The trial
court later enforced the award by entering final judgments in favor of the defendants. Ms. Berent
moved to set aside the judgments and requested a new trial. The trial court denied Ms. Berent’s
motions. The Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting
Ms. Berent’s efforts to vacate the arbitration award against her. The Court of Appeals’ decision
is final and binding. The Presiding Judge has no authority to reverse or alter the decision by the
assigned trial judge. Similarly, the Presiding Judge lacks authority to reverse or modify the
decision by the Court of Appeals.

IT IS ORDERED denying any request for relief set forth in the pleadings captioned Notice
that Motion for Emergency Injunction Sent to Presiding Judge Has Not Been Delivered by UPS
Tracking and Notice and Request for Protection from Sanctions or Adverse Action USPS Lost
Judges Motions Mailed to Her.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/26/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/22/2021

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

See LATER

Courtroom 108 – Northeast Regional Court

10:16 a.m. This is the time set for a Final Trial Management Conference via Court
Connect. Plaintiffs Michael Berent and Nancy Berent are present on behalf of themselves. Cross
Claimant Grazyna Mroczkowska, Defendant/Crossclaimant Marta Mroczkpwska who is present,
and Miroslaw Mroczkpwski are represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway.
Defendant/Crossdefendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc., is represented by
counsel, Kevin M. Arnold.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/22/2021

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 2

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

IT IS ORDERED vacating the 6 – Day Jury to a Trial set to begin on November 2, 2021
at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED resetting this matter for November 2, 2021 at 4:30 p.m.
(time allotted: 15 minutes) via Court Connect:

Please join the hearing via:
https://tinyurl.com/Courtroom108

You can also dial in using your phone.
Phone: +1 917-781-4590 and Conference ID: 929 847 029#

Use of the above link can be made easier by downloading the Microsoft Teams application first;
for more on the new platform, including an introduction video and participant guide, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect

10:32 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

The link to which the Court referred the Parties during the hearing is:

https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/civil/certified-arbitrator-program/

In advance of the November 2, 2021, Status Conference, the Parties shall attempt to reach
agreement on a prospective Certified Arbitrator from among this list:

https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/media/7130/certified-arbitrator-list.pdf

Should the Parties be unable to agree, they should arrive to the hearing with three top
choices each, and the Court will make the decision.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/26/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

10/25/2022

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTION DENIED

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s August 5, 2022, Request New Trial Due
to Judicial Interference Motion to Set Aside Award Due to Judicial Interference by Defendants.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s August 5, 2022, Request New Trial Due to Judicial
Interference Motion to Set Aside Award Due to Judicial Interference by Defendants.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/02/2022 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/01/2022

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MELISSA IYER JULIAN
A. Delgado

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KELSEY DRESSEN
JUDGE JULIAN

MOTION REJECTED

The Court has received Plaintiff’s October 19, 2022, Emergency Mandatory Permanent
Injunction of Mroczkowska Prohibited Paving Violation City Code Chapter 122-121, (h),(3), b.
per Fire Inspector Pete Pervl.

IT IS ORDERED rejecting Plaintiff’s October 19, 2022, Emergency Mandatory
Permanent Injunction of Mroczkowska Prohibited Paving Violation City Code Chapter 122-121,
(h),(3), b. per Fire Inspector Pete Pervl.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/05/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/02/2021

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
KENNETH L FIELDS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108 – Northeast Regional Court

4:29 p.m. This is the time set for a Status Conference via Court Connect. Plaintiffs
Michael Berent and Nancy Berent are present on behalf of themselves. Cross claimant Grazyna
Mroczkowska who is present, Defendant/Crossclaimant Marta Mroczkowska who is present and
Miroslaw Mroczkowski are represented by counsel, Debra S. Brockway.
Defendant/Crossdefendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. is represented by
counsel, Kevin M. Arnold.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/02/2021

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Pursuant to Admin. Order No. 2021-106,

IT IS ORDERED appointing Judge (Ret.) Ken Fields as the Certified Arbitrator in this
matter to conduct the Arbitration of this matter on December 20, and 21, 2021, using the
procedures of Ariz. R. Civ. P. 72–76 (rules for Arbitration proceedings), and such additional
procedures as may be agreed to by the Parties under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 53(a)(1)(A). Given the
Parties’ agreement,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the results of the arbitration shall be binding,
meaning no party may appeal from or collaterally attack the binding award, except as otherwise
provided by law.

4:39 Matter concludes.

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/09/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/07/2017

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

HEARING SET

IT IS ORDERED setting a Hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Designate Plaintiffs as
Vexatious Litigants on November 21, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. (1 hour allotted) before:

Judge John R. Hannah
Northeast Regional Court
18380 N. 40th St., Courtroom 102
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0759

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally and not by a court
reporter. Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/07/2017

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 2

submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/15/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/12/2021

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SARA J. AGNE
J. Holguin

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.

KEVIN M ARNOLD
DEBRA S BROCKWAY
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
KENNETH L FIELDS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK
JUDGE AGNE

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed a packet of documents entitled Objection to
Arbitrator Appointment, Motion Requesting Bell West Ranch File Counterclaim Against
Statutory Agent and Mroczkowska, filed November 5, 2021, by Plaintiff Nancy Berent. The
filing Plaintiff states no grounds in the documents for any objection to the appointed arbitrator
(and an arbitrator was appointed in large part due to this Plaintiff’s Request for Court-Appointed
Arbitrator Expediated Emergency Due to Age/Medical Problems of Plaintiff, filed October 22,
2021), and the only part of the documents noting the Objection is its title. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED overruling the Objection and affirming the Court’s Orders regarding
this case and the Certified Arbitration Program entered November 2, 2021, and filed November
5, 2021.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/12/2021

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion; Plaintiff cannot compel another
Party to file a counterclaim or counterclaims.

NOTE: Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative
Order 2020-79 requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at
all times they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks
or face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court facility or
asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject to a health
screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol will be denied
entrance to the court facility.

EXHIBIT NOTICE

This division is piloting CaseLines, a state-wide electronic exhibit portal. All exhibits
being submitted electronically must be submitted through CaseLines. When the case has been
initiated by the Clerk of Court, the attorney of record will receive an email invitation to the case
created in CaseLines. The division welcomes counsel to participate in CaseLines testing either
for an individual case or as part of a group mock trial event with a variety of counsel. Please call
(602) 506-8288 to be added to an email list for a mock trial event or to set up an appointment to
test for your case. Please access self-guided training and register for an account here:

https://www.azcourts.gov/digitalevidence/Training/Attorney-and-Self-Represented-
Litigants

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/16/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/13/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

The Court has received Defendant/Cross-Defendant Bell West Ranch HOA’s Request for
Court Reporter for November 21, 2017 Hearing.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant/Cross-Defendant Bell West Ranch HOA must pay the
authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial days before the proceeding and
present a copy of the receipt to this Court at the time of the hearing. The fee is $140 for a half-
day and $280 for a full day.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/17/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/15/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

IT IS ORDERED granting Ms. Berent and Mr. Berent’s request to appear telephonically
at the hearing set on November 21, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. Ms. Berent and Mr. Berent shall call this
Division at (602) 372-0759 promptly at the scheduled time.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/28/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/21/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JOHN L LOHR JR.

RULING

Courtroom 102 - NE

10:17 a.m. This is the time set for Case Management Conference. Plaintiffs Michael
Berent and Nancy Berent are present telephonically on their own behalves. Defendants Grazyna
Mroczkowska, Miroslaw Mroczkowski and Marta Mroczkowska are represented by counsel,
Debra S. Brockway. Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association Inc. is represented
by counsel, Maria R. Kupillas and Louis T. Seletos.

Court Reporter, Lori Thielmann, is present. A record of the proceedings is also made
digitally.

Discussion is held.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/21/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED that the parties go forward with mediation.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiffs’ motion to request mediator Shawn Aiken is
denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association’s
request to appoint Sharon Ng is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiffs’ request to assign case to court-appointed
mediator is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the request by Ms. Brockway today that this Court conduct
the mediation is denied.

This Court will appoint a judge or commissioner of the Superior Court to conduct a
settlement conference in this case.

IT IS ORDERED that all parties participate in the settlement proceeding in good faith.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties address in the settlement conference the
global issues, meaning all of the issues that exist between the parties which may need to be
resolved in order for there to be a permanent resolution of the disputes between these parties.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the judge that conducts the settlement conference
report to this Court on the result of the proceeding and on that judge’s opinion of whether each
party participated in good faith. The positions of the parties and their statements during the
mediation or settlement conference shall not be disclosed to this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Grazyna Mroczkowski be permitted to
participate by telephone. All other parties shall be personally present at the settlement
conference.

The judge who is going to conduct the settlement conference will contact the parties to
schedule the proceeding.

IT IS ORDERED defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association’s motion to
strike the third amended complaint filed October 24, 2017 is denied.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/21/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

The plaintiffs’ filing of October 30, 2017 that is titled “Response to Motion to Strike
Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint” is in substance an explanation of the Third Amended
Complaint and a request for permission to file it.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that filing will be treated as a motion to amend the
complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that responses or objections to the plaintiffs’ proposed
motion to amend (Third Amended Complaint) are due by December 11, 2017. The plaintiffs’
reply is due by December 22, 2017.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any motion to amend by defendants Mroczkowska is
due on December 22, 2017.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the response to that motion to amend will be due on
January 8, 2018 and any reply on that motion will be due not later than January 15, 2018.

As to plaintiffs’ filing entitled “ARCP Rule 26.1 Violation by Defendants Failure to
Disclose Unfavorable Info HOA Application for Driveway Install,”

IT IS ORDERED the Court takes no action. The Court’s understanding of this filing is
that there is no ongoing disclosure issue here but there may be a request for sanctions for not
disclosing the application sooner. That request is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiffs’ filing entitled “Article 26.1 Violation by Farmers
Ins. Suppression of Insurance Adjusters Report from Jan 2017 Rana Sammanni” treated as a
motion to compel the disclosure of communications between the adjuster and the plaintiffs’ prior
counsel and any report by the adjuster relating to the Berents and their property is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ former attorney, Mr. Lohr, shall turn
over to the plaintiffs any correspondence between himself and the Farmers’ adjuster. That
includes correspondence that he sent or correspondence that he received from the adjuster and
any reports or other materials that he was given by the adjuster.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this minute entry is to be endorsed on Mr. Lohr.

The Court notes that former counsel has an obligation to turn over the plaintiffs’ file, as
set forth in several State Bar opinions. Mr. Lohr is to review the matter and ensure that he has
complied with his obligation to provide the contents of the file to his former clients.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/21/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 4

With respect to plaintiffs’ filing entitled “Public Records Request from Farmers
Insurance Co. from Jan 2017 Investigation on 17986 N 167th Dr. Surprise AZ,”

IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ former counsel turn over to the plaintiffs all
correspondence that was received by him from the defendants or their lawyers or any third
parties in this litigation excepting only correspondence that purely relates to the business affairs
of counsel. Any correspondence relating to the representation of the plaintiffs in this case
(whether to or from counsel) shall be provided by counsel to the former clients forthwith as part
of counsel’s obligation to turn over the file to his former client when he withdraws from the
litigation.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for defendants Mroczkowska shall review
Rule 26.1(a)(10) with her clients and ensure that the disclosure required by Rule 26.1(a)(10)
regarding insurance has been made. If counsel believes that there is nothing to be disclosed then
she is to notify the plaintiffs in writing of that by December 11, 2017. Any disclosures are also
due by that date.

As to Plaintiffs’ filing dated November 13, 2017 referring to the Bell West Ranch
application violating several CC&R’s,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties meet and confer concerning an amended scheduling
order that takes into account all of the proposed amendments of the complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by January 26, 2018, the parties shall submit a
proposed amended scheduling order or if the parties are not able to agree then each party may
submit its own proposed form of order. The Court will then expect that the parties will comply
with the new scheduling order and that there will not be further extensions absent extraordinary
circumstances.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the objection to the defendants’ request to reschedule filed
November 13, 2017 is overruled. No further action need be taken by any party in that respect.

With respect to Defendant Bell West Ranch Homeowners Association’s Motion to
Designate Plaintiffs as Vexatious Litigants,

IT IS ORDERED as follows with respect to the conduct of the plaintiffs:

 Any request for information shall be directed first to the defendants’ attorneys, before the
filing of a motion or request to the Court. The request shall be made in writing. If the
information is not provided and the plaintiffs move to compel production, the motion

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

11/21/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 5

shall include the letter to defendants’ counsel, attached to the motion as proof that there
has been a request directly to counsel. Any request to compel information that does not
have attached to it the letter showing that counsel was first asked for that information will
not be considered by the Court.

 All filings shall include a statement in the caption of specifically what is being requested
in that filing. A general description is not sufficient. The caption shall say “motion to”
or “request to” and then it shall specify what it is that the plaintiffs are asking the Court to
order, and which defendant(s) specifically it is being directed to. If it is directed to both
defendants it shall specifically say that. Any defendant who is not named in the caption
as being the party at whom this motion or request is directed will not be required to
respond and the Court will take no action.

 The Plaintiffs shall refrain from arguing their case in filings that have no purpose other
than to argue the case. The content of the filings is to be directed to whatever request is
being made in that filing. The Court will not consider pretrial filings that are meant as
arguments of the plaintiffs’ position on the merits in the case and the defendants will not
be required to respond to any such filings.

 Counsel for the defendants are not required to respond to, and the Court will not consider,
any accusations of wrongdoing or misconduct unless the Court orders a response.

 The motion to designate the plaintiffs as vexatious litigants is otherwise denied.

IT IS ORDERED vacating the existing scheduling order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the settlement conference has not taken place by the
time the revised scheduling order is due, the parties shall include a deadline for the settlement
conference in the new scheduling order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs shall afford access to their property to an
appraiser for the defendants Mroczkowska at a reasonable time in a reasonable manner, after the
first of the year.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the appraiser shall be given such access to the property
and the home as the appraiser deems necessary to perform the appraisal.

12:11 p.m. Hearing concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/06/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/04/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JUDGE CONTES

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

Judge Connie Contes having agreed to conduct a settlement conference in this case,

IT IS ORDERED directing the parties and lawyers to contact Judge Contes’ office at
(602) 506-7768 to schedule the settlement conference.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/14/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/12/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOHN R. HANNAH JR
W. Tenoever

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
MICHAEL BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

NANCY BERENT
17974 N 167TH DR
SURPRISE AZ 85374
MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

The Court has before it a fax dated December 10, 2017 entitled “Scheduling Mediation”
from Plaintiffs Michael and Nancy Berent which the Court cannot consider for the following
reasons:

There is no indication on the document that a copy has been mailed to Defendants or
Defendants’ Attorney of record as required by Rules 5 and 7.1(a), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Court cannot consider an ex parte communication of this nature, nor can it give legal advice.

The Court cannot act on a faxed pleading without proof that the original document has been
filed with the Clerk of the Court in accordance with Rule 5(a),(g) & (h), Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure and Local Rules 2.1(b) & 2.19.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/12/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

For the foregoing reasons,

IT IS ORDERED rejecting the fax dated December 10, 2017 entitled “Scheduling
Mediation” from Plaintiffs Michael and Nancy Berent with no action taken.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/17/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/14/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

This Court has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Motion for Default against
defendant(s), Grazyna Mroczkowska and Marta Mroczkowska in the above-captioned case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).

The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Holding.

IT IS ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a default judgment
must be e-filed.

Pursuant to the Maricopa County eFiling Guidelines, Section 2.09, attorneys shall
electronically file all the documents required to request a default judgment, such as the Application for
Entry of Default, Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, Sum Certain Affidavit, and Application for

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/14/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

Attorneys’ Fees when appropriate and Statement of Costs, but shall submit a default judgment packet
required by the Court, including the documents identified on the default judgment packet coversheet,
in paper to the assigned commissioner’s division. A commissioner will not act upon a Motion for Entry
of Default Judgment until the default judgment packet with all the required documents has been
received by the division in paper form.

The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked questions
at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/19/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/18/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
K. Hartley

Deputy

MICHAEL BERENT, et al.
KRISTIN M. ROEBUCK

v.

GRAZYNA MROCZKOWSKA, et al.
DEBRA S BROCKWAY

MARIA R KUPILLAS
JEFFREY T MURRAY
COMM. HOLDING
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO

MINUTE ENTRY

This Court has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Motion for Default against
defendant(s), Miroslaw Mroczkowski in the above-captioned case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).

The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Holding.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-052655

12/18/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a default judgment
must be e-filed.

Pursuant to the Maricopa County eFiling Guidelines, Section 2.09, attorneys shall
electronically file all the documents required to request a default judgment, such as the Application for
Entry of Default, Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, Sum Certain Affidavit, and Application for
Attorneys’ Fees when appropriate and Statement of Costs, but shall submit a default judgment packet
required by the Court, including the documents identified on the default judgment packet coversheet,
in paper to the assigned commissioner’s division. A commissioner will not act upon a Motion for Entry
of Default Judgment until the default judgment packet with all the required documents has been
received by the division in paper form.

The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked questions
at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp

Documents