01/14/2026 — CV2025036466 ABRAMSOHN, KAY 01/14/2026 HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/15/2026 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
01/14/2026
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY
P. McKinley
Deputy
A Z N H REVOCABLE TRUST, et al.
JOHN F SULLIVAN
v.
KAY ABRAMSOHN, et al.
CHAD M GALLACHER
RAYA GARDNER
KARA MARIE KARLSON
KYLE ROBERT CUMMINGS
DEANIE J REH
JUDGE BLANEY
HEARING
East Court Building – Courtroom 411-VC-CV
9:04 a.m. This is the time set for a virtual Order to Show Cause Return Hearing on
Plaintiff’s Complaint for Special Action, filed October 8, 2025, which the Court is treating as an
Application for Order to Show Cause. Plaintiffs AZNH Revocable Trust, John Sullivan and Susan
Sullivan are represented by Counsel John F. Sullivan. Defendants Kay Abramsohn, in her official
capacity as Administrative Law Judge, Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings, and Tammy
Eigenheer, in her official capacity as Interim Director, Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings,
are represented by Counsel Kyle Robert Cummings. Defendant Arizona Department of Real
Estate is represented by Counsel Raya Gardner and Deanie J. Reh. Defendant Sunland Springs
Village Homeowners Association is represented by Counsel Chad M. Gallacher. All appearances
are virtual and/or telephonic.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
01/14/2026
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2
A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT this is a 15-minute Return Hearing. The Court will not
be receiving evidence today.
Discussion is held as to case status and steps forward.
For the reasons discussed on the record,
The Court will not be setting an Evidentiary Hearing and will instead rule on the filings.
9:11 a.m. Matter concludes.
03/25/2026 — CV2025036466 ABRAMSOHN, KAY 03/25/2026 HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/26/2026 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
03/25/2026
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY
P. McKinley
Deputy
A Z N H REVOCABLE TRUSTIMOPLA, et al.
JOHN F SULLIVAN
v.
KAY ABRAMSOHN, et al.
CHAD M GALLACHER
RAYA GARDNER
KARA MARIE KARLSON
KYLE ROBERT CUMMINGS
DEANIE J REH
JUDGE BLANEY
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
UNDER ADVISEMENT RULING
OAH Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RMD
The Court has reviewed and considered Plaintiff’s Complaint for Special Action,
Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Case Filings, the parties’ multitude of responsive and
related filings in this case, and the comments received at the January 14, 2026 Order to Show
Cause Return Hearing.
After hearing from the parties at the Return Hearing, the Court informed the parties that it
would not be setting an evidentiary hearing in this special action but would instead “rule on the
papers.” The Court notes that despite the straightforward, discrete issue in this case, the parties –
or at least some of them – have made a mess of the docket. The Court’s ruling on the merits will
moot most of those filings.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
03/25/2026
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2
Plaintiff Trust brought this special action arguing that it was denied its right to a peremptory
change of the assigned Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) in the administrative proceedings
below. The evidentiary hearing in those proceedings was scheduled for September 26, 2025. At
midnight on that same day, the current version of A.R.S. § 41-1092.07 went into effect – just nine
hours before the scheduled hearing. The newly enacted statute contained a provision that allowed
a party one peremptory change of the ALJ. Minutes after the statute went into effect, Plaintiff
exercised that right. But at the evidentiary hearing, the ALJ treated the peremptory challenge as a
motion and denied it. Plaintiff’s Counsel subsequently left the hearing without participation,
prompting the ALJ to dismiss the case.
The issue before the Court is whether Plaintiff was entitled to invoke A.R.S. § 41-
1092.07(A) – which states in part: “A party to a contested case or appealable agency action is
entitled to one peremptory change of administrative law judge.” The statutory right went into
effect – and Plaintiff invoked it – just hours before the start of the scheduled evidentiary hearing.
THE COURT FINDS that Plaintiff was entitled to exercise its right to peremptory
challenge of the assigned judge and did in fact properly and timely invoke that right under the
circumstances. The right came into existence hours before the hearing and thus Plaintiff could not
have invoked it any sooner. Further, “[a] statute that is merely procedural may be applied
retroactively,” San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Superior Court, 193 Ariz. 195, 205 ¶ 15 (1999), and §
41-1092.07 governs procedures for administrative proceedings.
THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that the ALJ acted in excess of her jurisdiction and
legal authority by issuing rulings on the case after Plaintiff properly exercised its right to
peremptory change of judge. To be clear, the Court does not fault the ALJ for the manner by
which she chose to interpret and apply this newly enacted statute in the absence of prior
precedent. But as a matter of law any actions taken by the challenged ALJ after Plaintiff’s
invocation of the right to change of judge are without effect.
On good cause, and in the Court’s discretion,
IT IS ORDERED granting in part the relief that Plaintiff seeks in its Complaint for Special
Action. Any orders, rulings, decisions, findings, and or recommendations issued in the case below
on or after September 26, 2025 are vacated.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendant Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings
shall reassign responsibility for Plaintiff’s case to an alternative Administrative Law Judge.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
03/25/2026
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED declining to address the parties’ remaining arguments and
filings as either moot or unpersuasive.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing Plaintiff to prepare and lodge a form of Judgment
on or before April 6, 2026. Plaintiff shall file any application for attorney’s fees and statements
of taxable costs by this deadline as well. Defendants shall file any objections or responses to the
form of judgment or to the request for attorney’s fees and costs within ten (10) days thereafter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Judgment shall contain Rule 54(c) language as upon
resolving attorney’s fees and costs, no further matters will remain pending.
10/10/2025 — CV2025036466 ABRAMSOHN, KAY 10/10/2025 HONORABLE JOSEPH P. MIKITISH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/13/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
10/10/2025
Docket Code 504
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOSEPH P. MIKITISH
P. McKinley
Deputy
A Z N H REVOCABLE TRUST, et al.
JOHN SULLIVAN
v.
KAY ABRAMSOHN, et al.
JUDGE BLANEY
JUDGE MIKITISH
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC
SPECIAL ACTION ASSIGNMENT
Agency Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RMD.
On October 8, 2025, Plaintiff, AZNH Revocable Trust, by and through John and Susan
Sullivan, Trustees, Real Parties in Interest, filed a Complaint for Special Action in the above cause
number.
IT IS ORDERED assigning this matter on October 10, 2025 to the Honorable Scott A.
Blaney for determination.
10/15/2025 — CV2025036466 ABRAMSOHN, KAY 10/15/2025 HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/16/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
10/15/2025
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT A. BLANEY
P. McKinley
Deputy
A Z N H REVOCABLE TRUST, et al.
JOHN SULLIVAN
v.
KAY ABRAMSOHN, et al.
KAY ABRAMSOHN
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TAMMY EIGENHEER
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL
ESTATE
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
SUNLAND SPRINGS VILLAGE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
JUDGE BLANEY
HEARING RESET
The Court has reviewed and considered Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to Reset Show Cause
Hearing and Extend Time to Serve Complaint & Order to Appear, filed October 14, 2025.
Good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion and vacating the virtual Order to Show Cause
Return Hearing on November 11, 2025 at 9:30 a.m. and resetting same to January 14, 2026 at
9:00 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) before this Division.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2025-036466
10/15/2025
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED extending the deadline for Plaintiff to serve Defendants to
December 15, 2025.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Minute Entry,
the Order to Appear and Plaintiff’s Complaint for Special Action on the Defendants.
PLEASE NOTE: The proceeding set above will be held via Court Connect (the Court’s
videoconference/virtual hearing platform). An auto-generated email will or has been sent to
counsel of record and any parties representing themselves who have a valid email address on file
in this matter with information for joining the proceeding virtually. If for some reason you did not
receive the email, you may join the proceeding using the following link: Tiny URL:
https://www.tinyurl.com/jbazmc-cvj09, or you may appear via telephone by calling 1-917-781-
4590, conference ID# 867 494 109#. For further information regarding Court Connect, please visit:
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect/
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.
