Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2006-016728: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Tenth Avenue Missions Homeowners Association Inc.

Case Number

CV2006-016728

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

11/3/2006

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Cronin, Mary

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/25/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
03/24/2009
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
FORM OF JUDGMENT
Plaintiff lodged a proposed Form of Judgment on January 6, 2009. On January 16, 2009,
Defendants filed an objection thereto. On February 2, 2009, Plaintiff filed a response. The
Court has reviewed the pleadings. Pursuant to Rule 7.1, the Court declines to schedule oral
argument.
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
•
Plaintiff shall submit an Amended Form of Judgment;
•
Paragraph 6 of the Judgment shall be amended as suggested by Plaintiff on lines 9
through 21 of page 2 of Plaintiff’s response;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
03/24/2009
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 2
•
Paragraph D of the Judgment shall be amended as suggested by Plaintiff on lines 7-
15 of page 3 of Plaintiff’s response;
•
The Amended Judgment shall include a paragraph providing that Defendants may
satisfy the Judgment by paying the amount owed thereunder prior to general
execution of foreclosure;
•
Overruling any objection not addressed above;
•
That the Judgment lodged by Plaintiff (unsigned ) be filed in the Court file.
TAXABLE COSTS
There being no objection, the Court finds that Plaintiff has incurred taxable costs in the
amount of $662.10.
IT IS ORDERED awarding taxable costs to Plaintiff in this amount.
ATTORNEY FEES
On January 6, 2009, Plaintiff filed an “Application for Attorneys’ Fees”. The Court has
reviewed the pleadings. Pursuant to Rule 7.1, the Court declines to schedule oral argument.
Pursuant to Plaintiff’s request,
IT IS ORDERED extending the deadline for Plaintiff’s Fee Application to January 6,
2009.
The Court finds that Plaintiff has incurred reasonable attorney fees in the amount of
$17,868.50 in prosecuting this action. The Court awards fees in this amount to Plaintiff.1

1 The applicable CC & Rs provide that fees “shall” be awarded in an action such as this. Even in the absence of this
provision, the Court would have awarded fees to Plaintiff in this amount pursuant to both § 12-341.01(A) and § 12-
349.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
03/24/2009
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 3
INACTIVE CALENDAR
IT IS ORDERED continuing this case on the Inactive Calendar until April 23, 2009. If
an amended Proposed Form of Judgment is not submitted by that date, this case will be
dismissed without further notice.
FILED: Unsigned Judgment

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/09/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
04/07/2010
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL L. BARTH
W. Thompson
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT
AND CAROL PORTONOVA
909 W FLYNN LN
PHOENIX AZ 85013
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom: OCH 005.
9:03 a.m. This is the time set for Judgment Debtor Examination. Plaintiff is represented
by counsel, Michael Orcutt.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Supplemental Proceedings
and service.
THE COURT FINDS the service upon the Defendants to be sufficient.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
04/07/2010
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED rejecting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Supplemental Proceedings as
ex-parte. The Court cannot consider the contents of the communication unless notice is given to
all interested parties. If relief is requested, the letter should be in proper motion format giving
any opposition notice to file any responsive pleadings they deem appropriate.
The Court notes that, even if Defendants had properly noticed all interested parties of the
Motion to Dismiss Supplemental Proceedings, it would have been inclined to deny the Motion
having found proper service.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing today’s Judgment Debtor Examination to April
21, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. in this division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 005
Phoenix, AZ 85003
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Judgment Debtors Carol Portonova and Dennis
Kleinschmit shall personally appear for the above scheduled event. Failure to appear may result
in the issuance of a civil arrest warrant.
9:05 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/19/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
04/16/2010
Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL L. BARTH
W. Thompson
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MICHAEL H ORCUTT
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT
AND CAROL KLEINSCHMIT
909 W FLYNN LN
PHOENIX AZ 85013
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received Judgment Debtors Dennis Kleinschmit and Carol Kleinschmit’s
Motion for Dismissal.
IT IS ORDERED setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the issue of service of the
supplemental proceedings upon the Judgment Debtors to be heard immediately prior to the
Judgment Debtor Examination set April 21, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. in this division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 005
Phoenix, AZ 85003
As previously stated in the Court’s April 7, 2010 minute entry, the Judgment Debtors’
failure to appear for the above scheduled event may result the issuance of a civil arrest warrant.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/27/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
04/21/2010
Docket Code 097
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL L. BARTH
W. Thompson
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MICHAEL H ORCUTT
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT
AND CAROL KLEINSCHMIT
909 W FLYNN LN
PHOENIX AZ 85013
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom: OCH 005.
9:08 a.m. This is the time set for Evidentiary Hearing and Judgment Debtor Examination.
Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor is represented by counsel, Michael Orcutt. Defendants/Judgment
Debtors, Dennis Kleinschmit and Carol Kleinschmit, are not present nor represented by counsel.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding the absence of the Judgment Debtors.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT today’s Evidentiary Hearing was set pursuant to

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
04/21/2010
Docket Code 097
Form V000A
Page 2
Defendants’ Motion for Dismissal.
Defendants having failed to appear this date and having the burden of proof to overcome
the statements of the Affidavit of Service filed March 26, 2010,
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendants April 16, 2010 Motion for Dismissal.
As to the Judgment Debtor Examination scheduled this date,
Plaintiff's counsel orally moves for the Issuance of a Civil Arrest Warrant and good cause
appearing,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff's oral Motion for the Issuance of a Civil
Arrest Warrant.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Civil Arrest Warrant issue directing any Peace Officer
in the State of Arizona to arrest such non-appearing person(s) and bring said person(s) before this
Court.
ISSUED: Civil Arrest Warrant (2).
This Warrant expires one year from the date of issuance.
Bond is set in the amount of $250.00.
9:14 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/25/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
06/23/2008
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
RICHARD V MACK
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
MOTION TO DISMISS
On March 14, 2008, Defendant filed a “Motion to Dismiss”. The Court has reviewed the
pleadings. For purposes of this motion, the Court deems the facts alleged in Plaintiff’s
Complaint to be true.
Plaintiff obtained a judgment against Defendants in justice court on May 30, 2002. On
October 17, 2006, Plaintiff filed a certified copy of this judgment in the Superior Court and, from
that date going forward, the judgment had like effect as a judgment of the Superior Court
pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-962.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
06/23/2008
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2
Defendants argue that the judgment was not effectively filed in the Superior Court.
Defendants argue that a justice court judgment may not be effectively filed in Superior Court
pursuant to § 33-962 unless accompanied by a “separate information statement” as discussed in
§ 33-967. Defendants’ argument is without merit. A “separate information statement” is a
prerequisite for perfecting a judgment as a lien. However, there is no requirement that such a
“separate information statement” be filed in Superior Court.
If not renewed within five years, judgments expire. Plaintiff’s judgment against
Defendants has never expired. Pursuant to § 12-1611, Plaintiff renewed its judgment against
Defendants by filing the instant action.
Plaintiff perfected its lien on the judgment against Defendants’ property on or about
February 7, 2008, when it recorded the renewed final judgment, accompanied by a § 33-967
“separate information statement”.
Section 33-1807 creates statutory liens for unpaid assessments in favor of homeowners
associations. Such statutory liens are extinguished if an action is not initiated within three years.
In this case, Plaintiff is not seeking to enforce a statutory lien. Rather, Plaintiff is seeking to
enforce a judgment lien. The three-year limitation on statutory liens is not applicable to this
action.
Plaintiff’s Complaint includes a prayer for “reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs…
pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1807….” Plaintiff admits on page six of the Response filed on April 2,
2008, that “A.R.S. § 33-1807 is inapplicable to this case….” Under the circumstances,
IT IS ORDERED dismissing Plaintiff’s claim for “reasonable attorneys’ fees and
costs… pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1807….”
Defendants have not established that the remainder of Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED denying the remainder of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss”.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
06/23/2008
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 3
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/MOTION TO STRIKE
A pleading filed by Plaintiff on April 2, 2008, includes a “Motion for Summary
Judgment”. Because they had filed a Motion to Dismiss, Defendants’ answer was not due at the
time the Motion for Summary Judgment was filed. Under the circumstances, Defendants’ filed
on May 5, 2008, a “Motion to Strike” Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
The Court has now denied Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
IT IS ORDERED establishing the deadline for Defendants’ Answer to be ten court days
after this minute entry is filed by the Clerk of the Court. Under the circumstances, striking
Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment would generate unnecessary attorney fees and would
be inconsistent with the interests of judicial economy. Under the circumstances,
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendants’ Motion to Strike.
Defendants have indicated a need to do discovery before responding to Plaintiff’s Motion
for Summary Judgment. Given all of the circumstances,
IT IS ORDERED extending to September 15, 2008, the deadline for Defendants’
Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
TELEPHONIC COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
On March 16, 2008, Plaintiff filed a “Request for Rule 16(b) Comprehensive Scheduling
Conference”.
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Rule 16 Comprehensive Pretrial Conference on
July 25, 2008 at 10:45 a.m., (allotted time: 15 minutes) in this division.
NOTE: This division will place the conference call at the time of the hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for all parties shall meet personally before
the Pretrial Conference and prepare a Joint Pretrial Memorandum addressing all applicable
subjects set forth in Rule 16(b) or Rule 16(c) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. The
parties shall file and provide this Division with a copy of the Joint Pretrial Memorandum no later
than five (5) judicial days before the conference, addressing all applicable subjects in ARCP 16.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
06/23/2008
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 4
Suggested dates for disclosure and discovery will be stated as dates certain and not, for example,
as “___ days before trial”. If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items in the Joint Pretrial
Memorandum, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Memorandum.
Counsel are reminded that the Court may impose sanctions against counsel and/or their
clients for failure to participate in good faith in the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum or the
Pretrial Conference.
If a party is not represented by counsel, that party has all of the obligations that would
otherwise be the obligations of counsel.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/31/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
07/25/2008
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
T. Melius
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
11:22 a.m. This is the time set for telephonic Pre-Trial Conference in this matter.
Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Corey I. Richter. Defendants are represented by counsel,
Andrew D. Lynch.
Court reporter, Lisa Edgar, is present.
Case status is discussed.
IT IS ORDERED imposing the following deadlines:
August 29, 2008
Deadline for initial Rule 26.1 disclosure statements
October 29, 2008
Deadline for propounding written discovery
December 17, 2008
Complete Rule 26.1 disclosure regarding expert and
non-expert witnesses

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
07/25/2008
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
January 14, 2009
Deadline of completion of depositions
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED establishing the deadline for dispositive and partially
dispositive motions to be December 17, 2008, or 120 days before trial, whichever date comes
first.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED extending the deadline for Plaintiff’s Response to the
pending Defense Motion for Summary Judgment to October 4, 2008.
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 requested to conduct a settlement conference not later than
September 28, 2008 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 no later than 5:00 p.m. on August 18, 2008. All counsel and
their clients, or non-lawyer representatives who have full and complete authority to settle the
case, shall personally appear and participate in good faith in the Settlement Conference.
Sanctions may be imposed for failure to participate.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a telephonic status conference for October 17,
2008 at 9:30 a.m. The Court will place the conference call. It is ordered that lead counsel
participate in this telephonic status conference.
11:32 a.m. Conference concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/21/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
08/14/2008
Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KENNETH L. FIELDS
T. Melius
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
Judge KENNETH FIELDS is appointed to conduct a Settlement Conference and to enter
stipulated orders in this matter, pursuant to Rule 16, A.R.C.P.
A Settlement Conference shall be held at Alternative Dispute Resolution, Downtown Justice
Center, 620 W. Jackson St., Suite 3076, Phoenix, Arizona on 9/10/2008 at 9:00 a.m. All parties and
their counsel (if parties are represented), shall appear in person at the Settlement Conference. All
Settlement Conference participants should expect to attend the Settlement Conference for at least three
hours, and docket their calendars accordingly.
Pursuant to Maricopa County Local Rule 3.11, counsel are to submit mediation/settlement
conference memorandum no later than 5:00 p.m. on 9/3/2008 by e-mail to: [email protected] or
[email protected]. This memorandum SHALL NOT be filed with the Clerk of Court.
Parties shall exchange the memoranda with each other, or with the consent of all parties, furnish the
memoranda sealed to the Settlement Judge.
The Settlement Conference Memorandum shall include the following information:
1.
A general description of the issues in the lawsuit, and each party’s position with respect to each issue;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
08/14/2008
Docket Code 070
Form V000A
Page 2
2.
A general description of the evidence each party intends to present, with respect to each issue stated
in item 1;
3.
A summary of all settlement negotiations that have previously occurred;
4.
An assessment by each party of the anticipated result if the matter did proceed to trial; and
5.
Any other information each party believes would be helpful to the settlement process.
All motions to continue the scheduled Settlement Conference shall be brought before the Settlement
Judge with a copy of the motion to be provided to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). If a
continuance is granted, the requesting party shall provide a signed copy of the Order to ADR. Any pre-
trial motions shall be brought before the judge permanently assigned to the case.
Any agreement the parties enter into, which is memorialized by the Settlement Judge shall be
considered a binding agreement, in accordance with Rule 80(d), A.R.C.P.
Failure to comply with this Court Order may result in the imposition of court sanctions,
pursuant to Rule 16(f) A.R.C.P.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
09/04/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
09/02/2008
Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
Through a separate signed order, the Court has extended to October 14, 2008 the
deadline for Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court
notes that it is quite unlikely that this deadline will be further extended.
On Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED continuing the Telephonic Status Conference which had been set for
October 17 to November 21, 2008, at 10:30 a.m. The Court shall initiate the conference call.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that lead counsel participate in the Telephonic Status
Conference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
09/02/2008
Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED approving and settling formal written Order signed by the
Court August 29, 2008 and filed (entered) by the Clerk September 2, 2008.
/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
10/26/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
10/24/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
RICHARD V MACK
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT
909 W FLYNN LN
PHOENIX AZ 85013
CAROL ANN PORTONOVA
909 W FLYNN LN
PHOENIX AZ 85013
MINUTE ENTRY
On September 28, 2007, Defendants filed a pleading entitled “Release of Lis Pendens”.
Through this pleading, Defendants request that “the Court release the Lis Pendens recorded” in
relation to this cause number. The Court makes note of the following:
•
This action remains pending. Through the action, Plaintiff seeks, among other
relief, foreclosure on the subject property.
•
Defendants provide no factual or legal support for their motion.
•
Since litigation is pending regarding the subject property, there appears to be no
legal basis for ordering release of the Lis Pendens.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
10/24/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
Under the circumstances,
IT IS ORDERED denying the relief requested by Defendants in the above-identified
pleading.
/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
11/21/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
11/20/2008
Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
Dueling Motions for Summary Judgment have not yet been ruled on. A status
conference prior to rulings on the summary judgment motions would be premature. Under the
circumstances, and on Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED continuing the Telephonic Status Conference which had been
scheduled for November 21 to January 30, 2009 at 10:45 a.m. The Court shall initiate the
conference call.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED lead counsel shall participate in the telephonic status
conference.
/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/02/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
12/01/2008
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
TENTH AVENUE MISSIONS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
COREY ISRAEL RICHTER
v.
DENNIS P KLEINSCHMIT, et al.
ANDREW D LYNCH
MINUTE ENTRY
On April 2, 2008, Plaintiff filed a pleading which includes a “Cross-Motion for Summary
Judgment”. On October 14, 2008, Defendants also filed a pleading which includes a Cross-
Motion for Summary Judgment”. The Court has reviewed the pleadings. Pursuant to Rule 7.1,
the Court declines to schedule oral argument.
The Court will not comment on all arguments made; however, the Court makes note of
the following:
•
In essence, Defendants argue that a renewed judgment cannot form the basis of a
valid lien. The Court rejects this argument. Plaintiff renewed its judgment
against Defendants on November 3, 2006. Plaintiff perfected this lien by
recording on or about February 7, 2008. At a minimum, this lien will remain
viable for five years after renewal of the judgment upon which it is based.
A.S.R. § 33-964.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2006-016728
12/01/2008
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 2
•
While Plaintiff could have pursued relief pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1807, Plaintiff
did not do so. Section 33-1807 does not abrogate other remedies available to a
planned community association.
•
A.R.S. § 33-722 precludes a creditor from simultaneously seeking money
damages and foreclosure. However, it does not preclude a creditor from first
obtaining a money judgment, and later seeking foreclosure based on the
unsatisfied money judgment. Mid Kansas Fed. S. & L.V. Dynamic Dev., 167
Ariz. 122, 126 (1991).
•
Plaintiff seeks issuance of a Writ of General Execution, requiring an officer to
satisfy the amount of $17,352.15, plus an additional three dollars per day going
forward from April 2, 2008.1 Based on the subject judgment and a conservative
calculation of interest pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1201, the judgment sought reflects
the amount owed to Plaintiff by Defendants.
•
The homestead exemption statute does not prevent issuance of a Writ of General
Execution in this case. However, it would prevent a foreclosure sale unless the
bid satisfies Defendants’ homestead plus the amount of any consensual liens with
priority. A.R.S. § 33-1105.
Plaintiff has established that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, it is
ordered granting Plaintiff’s “Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment” and denying Defendants’
“Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment”.
INACTIVE CALENDAR
IT IS ORDERED vacating any future court settings in this case. Further,
IT IS ORDERED placing this case on the Inactive Calendar until February 2, 2009. If
a proposed form of judgment is not submitted by that date, this case will be dismissed without
further notice.

1 It is expected that relief sought by Plaintiff will also include an award of fees and costs incurred in this case.

Documents