03/20/2025 — CV2025001940 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, PARADISE RIDGE 03/20/2025 HONORABLE RODRICK COFFEY View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court *** Electronically Filed *** 03/24/2025 8:00 AM SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY CV 2025-001940 03/20/2025 Docket Code 023 Form V000A Page 1 CLERK OF THE COURT HONORABLE RODRICK COFFEY S. Motzer Deputy PARADISE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CHRISTINA N MORGAN v. KIMBERLY KAYE OIUM KIMBERLY KAYE OIUM 10827 E LA JUNTA RD SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255 JUDGE COFFEY MINUTE ENTRY Plaintiff has requested service by alternative means pursuant to Rule 4.1 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 4.1 (k) provides as follows: Alternative Means of Service. (1) Generally. If a party shows that the means of service provided in Rule 4.1(c) through Rule 4.1(j) are impracticable, the court may--on motion and without notice to the person to be served--order that service may be accomplished in another manner. (2) Notice and Mailing. If the court allows an alternative means of service, the serving party must make a reasonable effort to provide the person being served with actual notice of the action's commencement. In any event, the serving party must mail the summons, the pleading SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY CV 2025-001940 03/20/2025 Docket Code 023 Form V000A Page 2 being served, and any court order authorizing an alternative means of service to the last-known business or residential address of the person being served. (3) Service by Publication. A party may serve by publication only if the requirements of Rule 4.1(l), 4.1(m), 4.2(f), or 4.2(g) are met and the procedures provided in those rules are followed. Whether traditional service is “impractical,” defined as “extremely difficult or inconvenient” is a fact specific inquiry. See Blair v. Burgener, 226 Ariz. 213, 245 P.3d 898 (App. 2010). Plaintiff has not demonstrated that service is impractical in this case. Only a few attempts to serve Defendant were made over a short period of time and the process server only knocked on the Defendant’s door once. Plaintiff must demonstrate multiple unsuccessful attempts at Defendant’s door at varying times and proof that a skip trace has been performed before the Court will authorize alternative service. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s request for service by alternative means, without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a renewed motion if further efforts at personal service are unsuccessful.