Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2009-054217: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Chauncey Ranch Office Condominium Association.

Case Number

CV2009-054217

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

10/16/2009

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Ponce, Adele

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/18/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
TRIAL SETTING MINUTE ENTRY
NORTHEAST COURTROOM 112
9:17 a.m.
This is the time set for a Status Conference for the purpose of setting this
matter for trial. All parties appear telephonically. Appearing on her own behalf is Plaintiff,
Mary Bishara. Appearing on behalf of Defendants Chauncey Ranch Office Investors LLC,
SAXA Inc., PCRES of Arizona LLC, and Barbara J. Lloyd PC is counsel, James Patrick
Armstrong.
A record of the proceedings is made by CD/videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
References to “counsel” shall be read to include unrepresented parties.
Court and counsel discuss the status of the case and scheduling matters.
IT IS ORDERED setting a Three-Day Jury Trial for September 6-8, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
before:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167
THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING.
Please note that normal trial days in this division are Monday through Thursday. 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 setting a Final Pretrial Management Conference on
August 26, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. (1 hour allotted). The Pretrial Management Conference shall be
governed by the Pretrial Management Orders issued this date. 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 August 19, 2011.
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
counsel may request a CD of the proceedings for a $20.00 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 602.372.7877.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3
With respect to the Notice of Settlement filed by the Plaintiff on December 10, 2010, if
Plaintiff believes that a settlement has been reached pursuant to Rule 80(d), Arizona Rules of
Civil Procedure, Plaintiff may file a motion to enforce the settlement agreement.
With respect to Defendants’ request to set oral argument on pending motions, the parties
are advised that the Court will consider the materials filed in support of and in opposition to the
pending motions and that oral argument will only be set in the event that the Court determines it
would be beneficial to the Court.
9:22 a.m. Matter concludes.
All parties representing themselves must keep the Court updated with address changes.
A form may be downloaded at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/Self-
ServiceCenter/index.asp

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4
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.,
August 19, 2011.
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;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5
(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;
(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 at the time of the filing of the joint pretrial
statement, the parties shall file (A) an agreed-upon set of jury instructions, proposed verdict
forms, and voir dire questions and (B) any additional jury instructions, verdict forms, and voir
dire questions requested, but not agreed upon, (C) a statement by each party on how a verbatim
record of the trial will be made (i.e., cd/videotape or court reporter).
4.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each party intending to submit a jury notebook to
the jurors shall submit a copy of the notebook to opposing counsel five days before the final
pretrial conference, or if no conference is scheduled, five days before the trial.
5.
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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6
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.
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.
ATTACHED: SAMPLE FORMAT FOR TIME ESTIMATE FORM
AND EXHIBIT
PROCEDURES

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7
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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 8
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 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 9
GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL WHEN PREPARING EXHIBITS FOR USE IN COURT
COUNSEL PLEASE READ
Exhibits are due to the Court not later than five business days prior to Final Pretrial
Management Conference.
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. If your list refers to an exhibit and it is not
provided at the time of marking, the numbers of all following exhibits will be moved up. The
clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later date. Exhibits will be
marked as they are received. Do not list “Any and all exhibits listed by ….”
****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 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.
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-
372-7736.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
01/14/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 10
Sample of List of Exhibits to be provided to the courtroom clerk:
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit
No.
Identi-
fied By
Description
Stipulated in
Evidence/
Objection

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/22/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
02/14/2011
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has considered Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Jury Trial Waiver filed
January 14, 2011, Plaintiff’s Response, and Defendants’ Reply.
Pursuant to the parties’ lease agreement and the March 30, 2010, Joint Pretrial
Memorandum,
IT IS ORDERED granting the above-noted motion. The trial scheduled for
September 6-8, 2011, shall be tried to the Court and not to a jury.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Final Pretrial Management Conference
previously set for August 26, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. in this division.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Orders 2010–117 and 2011-
10 to determine their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/23/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
02/22/2011
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED setting a Status Conference for February 24, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
(15 minutes allotted) before:
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167
Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants shall appear in person for this hearing.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
02/22/2011
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Orders 2010-117 and 2011-
10 to determine their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/01/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
02/24/2011
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
NE Courtroom 112
9:03 a.m. This is the time set for a Status Conference. Present on her own behalf is
Plaintiff, Mary Bishara. Present on behalf of Defendants Chauncey Ranch Investors LLC,
SAXA Inc., PCRES of Arizona LLC, and Barbara Lloyd, PC is counsel, James Patrick
Armstrong.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held with respect to whether this matter has been settled.
9:15 a.m. Court stands at recess to afford the parties the opportunity to finalize their
settlement terms.
9:27 a.m. Court reconvenes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
02/24/2011
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
The parties have been unable to agree on the settlement terms.
With respect to Plaintiff’s pending Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum filed on
December 29, 2010,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file her Reply in support of her Motion to Quash
and shall attach a copy of the subpoena duces tecum she seeks to have quashed, no later than
March 3, 2011.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash
Subpoena Duces Tecum for March 25, 2011 at 8:30 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) before:
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167
Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants shall appear in person for this hearing.
9:33 a.m. Matter concludes.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Orders 2010-117 and 2011-
10 to determine their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/04/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
After review,
IT IS ORDERED that Oral Argument regarding Defendants’ Motion for Security for
Costs and its Motion in the Alternative to Conduct Discovery Regarding Property Owned by
Plaintiff within the State of Arizona shall be heard in conjunction with the Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference currently set in this matter for April 2, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/04/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
TELEPHONIC RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET
The Court having received Plaintiff’s Motion to Set and Certificate of Readiness and
Defendants’ Controverting Certificate thereto and Request to Set Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference,
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference pursuant to Rule
16(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, for April 2, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) in this
division. Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call to this division at 602.506.3105.
The parties and counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences via cell phones
or speakerphone.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED counsel for all parties shall personally meet and prepare a
Joint Comprehensive Pretrial Memorandum addressing all subjects set out in Rule 16(b), Rules
of Civil Procedure. The Joint Comprehensive Pretrial Memorandum shall be submitted to the
Court not later than 5:00 p.m., March 26, 2010. In the event the parties choose to e-File the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2
memorandum, the parties shall attach a proposed scheduling order to the memorandum for the
Court’s consideration.
NOTE: The parties are advised this Division does not set a trial date until completion of
mediation either through a Judge pro tem or a private mediator.
JOINT PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM ORDER
IT IS ORDERED:
All counsel parties are directed to meet personally to discuss all of the matters set forth in
Rule 16(b) A.R.C.P. Counsel shall prepare and file with the Court a Joint Pretrial Memorandum,
and prepare a proposed order for Discovery and Disclosure deadlines. The proposed order
shall include details and dates for the following items:
1. An agreed-upon schedule for completion of discovery. As far as can reasonably be
anticipated, each party shall set forth the depositions they anticipate taking and the approximate
time required for each; any and all medical examinations which may be required of any of the
parties; the person or persons to conduct such examinations; all requests for production; and all
tangible evidence to be disclosed or exchanged.
2. A date for the final disclosure of expert witnesses, and/or to supplement disclosures
made to date.
3. A date or dates for the final disclosure of all non-expert witnesses, and/or to
supplement disclosures made to date.
4. The number of additional non-uniform interrogatories requested by each party and the
reasons for the requests. Further, counsel shall set forth any written discovery outstanding and a
date when it will be complete.
5. An agreement to waive the Rule 38.1 A.R.C.P. time limits or a statement as to how to
comply with the limits in light of the positions taken by the parties with respect scheduling of
discovery, etc.
6. A proposed completion date for a Mandatory Settlement Conference pursuant to Rule

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3
16.1 A.R.C.P. or for Mediation or Arbitration; and a Certificate of Compliance by counsel and all
parties of the provisions of Rule 16(g)(2) A.R.C.P.
A discussion of any discovery disputes to date or Rule 26.1 compliance issues.
7.
NOTE: Please reference the Court’s policy on discovery disputes set forth below.
8. The position of each counsel on the medium and manner of recording a verbatim
record of future proceedings.
IF THE PARTIES AGREE AS TO THE DATES, THEY NEED ONLY PREPARE THE
PROPOSED ORDER AND INCORPORATE IT BY REFERENCE. If counsel are unable to
agree on any of the items of the Pretrial Statement, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be
set forth in the Pretrial Memorandum and each shall prepare a separate proposed order.
IT IS ORDERED that should any discovery disputes arise, prior to filing discovery
motions, counsel shall MEET AND CONFER EITHER FACE TO FACE OR VIA
TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE. If counsel are not able to resolve the dispute, either party may
request an expedited hearing to resolve the dispute(s), which shall be accompanied by a Rule
37(2)(C) certification and a statement of not more than three pages in length setting forth the
problems requiring Court attention.
To aid the parties in their efforts to avoid the need for court intervention in discovery
matters, please note this division’s “discovery philosophy”, which embraces a liberal view
as to what is discoverable (while acknowledging the need, at times, for privacy protections).
If the Court finds that a discovery request is burdensome, it will undertake to do what
counsel should do: determine an equitable method for addressing discovery costs. Other
objections, especially those based upon “relevance”, are viewed skeptically. Those unable to
resolve disputes informally should be aware that monetary or non-monetary consequences
may result if the Court concludes a party or counsel are acting other than in a spirit of
courteous cooperation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following rules shall apply to all depositions
conducted in this action unless otherwise ordered by the Court:
No objections shall be made except as follows:
A.
Object to the form of the question.
i.
Object, privileged under the [applicable] privilege.
ii.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 4
No speaking objections shall be allowed. If, but only if, the questioner asks for the
B.
basis of an objection to the form of the question a brief explanation shall be given.
If a privilege objection is made, the particular question shall not be answered without
C.
subsequent court order. [Note: the Court welcomes a call from the deposition so that
the matter may be addressed immediately in accordance with the Court’s discovery
philosophy.] The deposition shall proceed subject to reconvening if the court should
later overrule the objection. Fees, costs and other sanctions may be imposed for
groundless privilege objections.
Attorneys shall not interrupt witnesses. Lengthy compound questions shall be
D.
avoided.
The length of any deposition shall not exceed four (4) hours (excluding breaks)
E.
without the agreement of all counsel or a prior order of the court.
There shall be no attorney-client conferences between the witness and his/her attorney
F.
while any question is pending. There shall be no such conferences during the
question sessions of the deposition.
Unless agreed by all parties, any commenced deposition shall proceed on a business
G.
day until completed unless suspended by any party pursuant to Rule 30(d), Ariz. R.
Civ. P.
JOINT PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM AND PROPOSED ORDER
If the parties agree to the dates, they should prepare an Order in the form set forth below,
containing the provisions which are applicable to their case. For example, paragraph 1 of the
Order set forth below need not be included in the parties’ proposed Order if the parties intend to
disclose their experts’ identity and opinions at the same time they disclose their experts’ areas of
testimony. Similarly, if the parties agree to simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of
their expert witnesses, they need not include in their proposed Order the language set forth in
paragraph 2a. and b., below.
The proposed Order shall include specific dates (“December 5, 2009” is a specific
date. “90 days prior to trial” is a date in reference to a trial date and is not a specific date).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 5
Do not incorporate a firm trial date in the proposed Order.
If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items that are to be included in the Order, the
reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in their Pretrial Memorandum and each shall
prepare a separate proposed Order.
PROPOSED ORDER LANGUAGE:
The Court has received and reviewed the parties’ Joint Pretrial Memorandum and
proposed Scheduling Order.
In accordance therewith,
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose areas of expert testimony by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. [or]
2. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on _________, 2010.
3. Defendants shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on _________, 2010.
4. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of
their expert witnesses by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. [or]
5. Plaintiffs shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by 5:00 p.m.
on ________, 2010.
6. Defendants shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
7. Any and all discovery requests shall be served by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
8. The parties shall disclose all non-expert witnesses by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
[or]
8. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on ________,
2010.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 6
9. Defendants shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on ________,
2010.
10. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose their rebuttal expert witnesses
and opinions by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
11. All discovery shall be concluded by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
12. All dispositive motions shall be filed and served by 5:00 p.m. on _________, 2010.
13. The parties shall have exchanged up-to-date final Rule 26.1 Supplemental Disclosure
Statements by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. This Order does not replace the parties’ obligation
to seasonably disclose on an on-going basis under Rule 26.1 as information becomes available.
14. Settlement conference (choose one):
The parties shall participate in private mediation by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010;
OR
The parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference and this matter is
referred to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution for the appointment of a judge pro tempore
to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel and any "pro per" parties will contact the appointed
judge pro tempore to arrange the time and location for the settlement conference. The judge pro
tempore shall conduct a settlement conference not later than ________, 2010. The Office of
Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please
do not contact that office. If counsel prefer to use a private mediator to conduct the Settlement
Conference, a Stipulation and Order re: Alternative to ADR must be presented to the Court by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
15. No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be used at trial
other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause shown or written agreement
of the parties.
16. A telephonic status conference is set for ________, 2010 at ________ _.m. for the
purpose of assigning a trial date if the case has not settled.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 7
17. The dates set forth in this Order are FIRM dates and will not be extended or modified
by this Court absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not ordinarily be considered good
cause.
Notices of Settlement
In accordance with the provisions of A.R.C.P. 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 2009-054217
03/03/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 8
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/28/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/25/2011
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion and due to a calendaring conflict,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the Oral Argument regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash
Subpoena Duces Tecum previously set for March 25, 2011 and resetting same for
March 28, 2011 at 10:30 a.m. (20 minutes allotted) before:
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/25/2011
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 2
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Orders 2010-117 and 2011-
10 to determine their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/29/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/28/2011
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
FINANCIAL SERVICES-CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
NE Courtroom 112
10:31 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash
Subpoena Duces Tecum filed December 29, 2010. Present on her own behalf is Plaintiff Mary
Bishara. Present on behalf of Defendants Chauncey Ranch Office Investors LLC, SAXA Inc.,
and Barbara J. Lloyd PC is counsel, James Patrick Armstrong.
Argument is presented to the Court.
Discussion is held with respect to the ongoing settlement efforts by the parties.
Discussion is held with respect to Defendants’ Motion to Deposit Settlement Proceeds
with Court filed March 23, 2011. Based thereon and pursuant to the agreement of the parties,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
03/28/2011
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED that settlement proceeds in the amount of $32,500.00 shall be
deposited by Defendants with the Clerk of Court within five days of this Order.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Defendants have agreed in open court this day to
deposit the above-noted sum no later than close of business this day.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall have, hold, and deposit the
settlement proceeds for the benefit of Plaintiff, to be released to Plaintiff upon order of this Court
after execution of settlement documents by Plaintiff.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court’s $26.00 fee for accepting the
deposit shall be borne by Defendants and shall be in addition to the settlement proceeds.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if settlement is not consummated by written
settlement agreement executed by all parties within 21 days of the date of this Order, the deposit
shall be released to Defendants upon order of this Court.
With respect to the pending Motion to Quash,
IT IS ORDERED that this matter shall be deemed taken under advisement as of
April 5, 2011, unless prior to that date the Court is notified that the settlement agreement has
been executed.
10:52 a.m. Matter concludes.
FILED: Order
All parties representing themselves must keep the Court updated with address changes.
A form may be downloaded at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/Self-
ServiceCenter/index.asp
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Orders 2010-117 and 2011-
10 to determine their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/06/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
04/02/2010
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET
MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT
Northeast Courtroom 112
10:03 a.m. This is the time set for a Comprehensive Pretrial Conference and for Oral
Argument regarding Defendants’ Motion for Security for Costs and its Motion in the Alternative
to Conduct Discovery Regarding Property Owned by Plaintiff within the State of Arizona.
Appearing telephonically on her own behalf is Plaintiff, Mary Bishara. Present on behalf of the
Defendants is counsel, James Patrick Armstrong.
A record of the proceedings is made by CD/videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
References to “counsel” shall be read to include unrepresented parties.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
04/02/2010
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2
Discussion is held regarding the parties’ Joint Pretrial Memorandum. In that regard,
IT IS ORDERED approving the deadlines set forth in the parties’ scheduling Order
eFiled on March 30, 2010 except as specifically modified and signed by the Court on
April 2, 2010, and filed (entered) by the clerk on April 2, 2010.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties shall participate in a mandatory
Settlement Conference. This case is referred to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution for
the appointment of a judge pro tempore to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel and/or
the parties will receive a minute entry from ADR appointing the judge pro tempore.
Counsel and any "pro per" parties will contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange
the date, time and location for the settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is directed to
complete a settlement conference not later than November 12, 2010. The Office of Alternative
Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not
contact that office.
If counsel prefer to use a private mediator to conduct the Settlement
Conference, a Stipulation and Order re: Alternative to ADR must be presented to the Court by
5:00 p.m. on May 17, 2010 and must provide for the private mediation/conference to be
completed by November 12, 2010.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED
setting a Telephonic Status Conference on
November 18, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) for the purpose of scheduling dates for
the final pretrial management conference and for trial. Defense counsel shall initiate the
conference call to this division at 602.506.3167. The parties and counsel shall not be
permitted to participate in conferences via cell phones or speakerphone.
Note: Due to judicial rotations the hearing(s) set herein shall be held before:
THE HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
602.506.3167
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Plaintiff has stated that it is her intention to appear
in person for the above-noted Status Conference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
04/02/2010
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 3
Argument is presented to the Court with respect to Defendants’ Motion for Security for
Costs and its Motion in the Alternative to Conduct Discovery Regarding Property Owned by
Plaintiff within the State of Arizona.
IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.
10:16 a.m. Matter concludes.
All parties representing themselves must keep the Court updated with address changes.
A form may be downloaded at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/Self-
ServiceCenter/index.asp
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/07/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
04/05/2010
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
The Motion for Security for Costs having been under advisement, the Court rules as
follows:
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendants’ Motion for Security for Costs without prejudice.
The Court heard statements of the Plaintiff that she did not have the ability to give
security, but these statements are not persuasive. Therefore,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file, within ten (10) days of the date
of entry of this order, an affidavit pursuant to the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure 67(e) to
give strict proof of her inability to give the security. Should Defendants object to the affidavit,
once filed, the Court will set a time when the Plaintiff shall be examined orally as to the inability
to give such security. In the event that Plaintiff fails to file her affidavit within the time allowed,
the Court will set bond in the amount of $1,500.00 upon notice by the Defendants that the
Plaintiff has failed to comply with this order.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
05/20/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
05/19/2010
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
Pursuant to Defendants’ Notice of Election for Use of Private Mediator eFiled on
May 17, 2010,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the referral to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Dept. for
the appointment of a judge pro tem to serve in this matter.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/07/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
06/03/2010
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
J. Nothwehr/R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court having received and reviewed the Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration filed
on May 26, 2010,
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants shall file a Response within 15 days of the file date
of this minute entry.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/09/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
07/07/2010
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER STEPHEN KUPISZEWSKI
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court having considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsiderati
on filed on
May 26, 2010 and the Response thereto,
IT IS ORDERED the parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement
Conference. This case is referred back to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution for the
appointment of a judge pro tempore to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel and/or the
parties will receive a minute entry from ADR appointing the judge pro tempore. Counsel
and any "pro per" parties will contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange the date, time
and location for the settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is directed to complete a
settlement conference not later than November 12, 2010. The Office of Alternative Dispute
Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not contact that
office.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
07/15/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
07/12/2011
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
FINANCIAL SERVICES-CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has reviewed Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement and
Motion in the Alternative to Enlarge Time Period for Filing Dispositive Motions, Plaintiff’s
Response, and Defendants’ Reply.
This Court presided over a hearing in this case on March 28, 2011. The purpose of the
hearing that day was to rule upon Plaintiff’s motion to quash the Chauncey party’s subpoena
duces tecum. During the course of the hearing the parties again discussed whether settlement
had been reached. Plaintiff acknowledged that she had received settlement documents from
Defendants. She indicated she had no objection to the terms of the settlement agreement, but
was unwilling to execute the settlement documents until such time as she received full payment.
The Court suggested an alternative to both parties. That alternative was for Defendants to post
the full amount of the settlement proceeds with the Clerk of Court. Defendant also agreed to pay
the filing fee for this deposit. Thereafter, Plaintiff would execute the settlement documents, and
return them to Defendants. The Court would then authorize the Clerk of Court to release the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
07/12/2011
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
settlement proceeds directly to Plaintiff. Both parties agreed to this process on the record in
open court.
Contrary to the position taken in open court on March 28, 2011, Plaintiff now complains
about a number of sections of the settlement papers.
This Court finds that the parties reached a settlement in open court on March 28, 2011.
The terms of the settlement were as set forth in the settlement documents previously delivered to
Plaintiff, and for the amount of $32,500.00 to be paid by Defendant to Plaintiff. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED declaring that the parties have fully settled all of their respective
claims between one another.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to release the settlement
proceeds previously posted by Defendants in the amount of $32,500.00 directly to Plaintiff,
Mary Bishara.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing this case with prejudice effective on
July 29, 2011.
/ s / HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
ALERT: eFiling through AZTurboCourt.gov is mandatory in civil cases for attorney-
filed documents effective May 1, 2011. See Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Orders
2010-117 and 2011-010. The Court may impose sanctions against counsel to ensure compliance
with this requirement after May 1, 2011.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/22/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
07/20/2010
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has considered Plaintiff’s Affidavit of Inability to Give Security for Cost, the
Objection filed by Chauncy Office Investors, LLC, Saxa, Inc., PCRES of Arizona, LLC, and
Barbara J. Lloyd, P.C. (Defendants), Plaintiff’s Response, and Defendants’ Reply.
Plaintiff’s affidavit fails to comply with the Court’s prior order of April 7, 2010, that
Plaintiff’s Affidavit of Inability to Give Security for Costs provide “strict proof of her inability to
give security” pursuant to Rule 67(d), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall post bond in the amount of $1,500.00 with the
Clerk of Court no later than July 30, 2010.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/02/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/01/2010
Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
Pursuant to the Protective Order signed by the Court on August 31, 2010, and filed
(entered) by the clerk on September 1, 2010,
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion and vacating the depositions of Mike Piekarskai
for September 1, 2010, and Barbara Lloyd and Jeff Tricco for September 2, 2010, and Craig Cote
and Scott Daniels for September 3, 2010, and resetting them for a mutually agreed upon date no
later than September 30, 2010.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall not depose Aida Azziz, Harry
Jacobson, or Mary Bisara until the depositions of Mike Piekarskai, Barbara Lloyd, and Jeff
Tricco have been completed.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/02/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/01/2010
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has considered Defendants’ Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to
Disclose Defendants’ Expert Witnesses and Opinions, Plaintiff’s Response, and Defendants’
Reply.
IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants’ Motion for Enlargement of Time. Defendants
shall disclose its expert witnesses and opinions no later than September 15, 2010.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/01/2010
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/15/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/14/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion and after review of Defendants’ Motion for Telephonic
Status Conference Regarding Deposition Scheduling,
IT IS ORDERED setting a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference for October 22, 2010 at
9:30 a.m. (15 minutes allotted) before:
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167
Counsel and/or the parties, if unrepresented, must appear in person for this hearing.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/14/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows:
Counsel and/or the parties are to meet personally to discuss all of the matters set forth in
Rule 16(b), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedures (ARCP). Counsel and/or the parties shall prepare
and file with the Court on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 15, 2010 a Joint proposed Scheduling
Order for discovery, motion, and disclosure deadlines.
If the parties agree to the dates, they should prepare an Order in the form attached hereto,
containing the provisions which are applicable to their case. For example, paragraph one of the
Order set forth below need not be included in the parties’ proposed Order if the parties intend to
disclose their experts’ identity and opinions at the same time they disclose their experts’ areas of
testimony. Similarly, if the parties agree to simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of
their expert witnesses, they need not include in their proposed Order the language set forth in
paragraph 2a. and b., below.
The proposed Order shall include specific dates (12/22/2010 rather than 45 days from
close of discovery). Do not incorporate a firm trial date in the proposed Order.
If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items that are to be included in the Order, the
reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in their proposed Order.
If a Joint proposed Scheduling Order is not timely submitted, the Court will place the
matter back on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal.
NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/14/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3
[PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER
The Court has reviewed the parties’ Joint Proposed Scheduling Order and adopts and/or
modifies the days as follows:
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose areas of expert testimony by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. [or]
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on _________,
2010.
b. Defendants shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on _________,
2010.
2. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of
their expert witnesses by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. [or]
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
b. Defendants shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by
5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
3. Any and all discovery requests shall be served by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
4. The parties shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony and the identity of each
witness by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. [or]
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony and the identity of each
witness by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
b. Defendants shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony and the identity of each
witness by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
5. The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose their rebuttal expert witnesses
and opinions by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/14/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 4
6. The parties shall have exchanged up-to-date final Rule 26.1 Supplemental Disclosure
Statements by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010. This Order does not replace the parties’
obligation to seasonably disclose on an on-going basis under Rule 26.1 as information
becomes available.
7. All discovery shall be concluded by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
8. Settlement conference (choose one):
The parties shall participate in private mediation by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010;
OR
The parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference and this matter is
referred to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution for the appointment of a judge
pro tempore to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel and any "pro per" parties
will contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange the time and location for the
settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is requested to conduct a settlement
conference not later than ________, 2010. The Office of Alternative Dispute
Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not
contact that office. If counsel prefer to use a private mediator to conduct the
Settlement Conference, a Stipulation and Order re: Alternative to ADR must be
presented to the Court by 5:00 p.m. on ________, 2010.
9. No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be used at trial
other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause shown or written
agreement of the parties.
10. All pretrial motions, other than motions in limine, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. on
________, 2010.
11. A Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference is set for *****, 2010 at
****a.m./p.m. for the purpose of assigning a trial date if the case has not settled.
Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. 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) 506-3167 promptly at the
scheduled time.
NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings.
However, any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the
division three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
09/14/2010
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 5
12. Should any discovery disputes arise, counsel, prior to filing discovery motions, shall
meet and confer pursuant to Rule 37, ARCP.
13. The dates set forth in this Order are FIRM dates and will not be extended or modified
by this Court absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not ordinarily be
considered good cause.
14. This case is removed from the Inactive Calendar and all requirements of Rule 38.1,
ARCP, are waived unless and until otherwise ordered by the Court.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/19/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/18/2010
Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the Rule 16 Comprehensive Pretrial Conference previously
set for October 22, 2010, and accelerating same to October 21, 2010 at 8:45 a.m.
Counsel
and/or the parties are to appear personally before:
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. McVEY
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 112
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032
(602) 506-3167

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/18/2010
Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/27/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/21/2010
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
MINUTE ENTRY
NE Courtroom 112
8:50 a.m. This is the time set for a Rule 16 Comprehensive Pretrial Conference. Present
on her own behalf is Plaintiff Mary Bishara. Present on behalf of Defendants Chauncey Ranch
Investors LLC, SAXA Inc., PCRES of Arizona LLC, Barbara J Lloyd PC, Chauncey Ranch
Office Condominium Association and Defendant/Counterclaimant Chauncey Ranch Office
Investors LLC is counsel, James Patrick Armstrong.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding the separate [proposed] scheduling orders submitted for the
Court’s consideration.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/21/2010
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling the formal written scheduling Order
electronically filed by the Defendants on October 14, 2010, except as specifically modified and
signed by the Court on this date.
Please note that conformed copies of the above-referenced signed Order are mailed this
date to Mr. Armstrong and Ms Bishara.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling
Conference on January 14, 2011 at 9:15 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 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) 506-3167 promptly at the scheduled time. The parties and
counsel shall not be permitted to participate in conferences via cell phones or
speakerphone.
9:04 a.m. Matter concludes.
FILED: Order (scheduling)
All parties representing themselves must keep the Court updated with address changes.
A form may be downloaded at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/Self-
ServiceCenter/index.asp
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/24/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/21/2011
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL R. MCVEY
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
MARY BISHARA
MARY BISHARA
17422 N 100TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
v.
CHAUNCEY RANCH INVESTORS L L C, et al.
JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG
PRUDENTIAL C R E S COMMERCIAL
REAL ESTATE
14287 N 87TH ST STE 200
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85260
FINANCIAL SERVICES-CCC
CHAUNCY CORPORATIONS
14287 N 87TH ST STE 101
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85260
BARBARA J LLOYD
2944 N 44TH ST STE 200
PHOENIX AZ 85018
SAXA INC
14287 N 87TH ST STE 101
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85260
MINUTE ENTRY

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2009-054217
10/21/2011
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Petition the Court for the Release of Security for Cost
Funds, filed September 18, 2011. No Objection or Response was filed.1
IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Petition the Court for the Release of Security for
Cost Funds.
ALERT: Effective September 1, 2011, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order
2011-87 directs the Clerk's Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil
cases must still be initiated on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through
AZTurboCourt unless an exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

1 Failure to respond to a motion may be deemed consent to a grant of the relief requested. Rule
7.1, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.

Documents