01/29/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 01/29/2020 HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/31/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
01/29/2020
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE THEODORE CAMPAGNOLO
A. Wood
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
COMM. POPHAM
JUDGE CAMPAGNOLO
MINUTE ENTRY
This Court has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Motion for Default against
Defendant(s), Magton LLC in the above-captioned case.
IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).
The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Popham.
IT IS ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a default judgment
must be e-filed.
Pursuant to the Maricopa County eFiling Guidelines, Section 2.09, attorneys shall
electronically file all the documents required to request a default judgment, such as the Application for
Entry of Default, Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, Sum Certain Affidavit, and Application for
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
01/29/2020
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
Attorneys’ Fees when appropriate and Statement of Costs, but shall submit a default judgment packet
required by the Court, including the documents identified on the default judgment packet coversheet,
in paper to the assigned commissioner’s division. A commissioner will not act upon a Motion for Entry
of Default Judgment until the default judgment packet with all the required documents has been
received by the division in paper form.
The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked questions
at: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp
02/27/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 02/27/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/02/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
02/27/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom 105 - NER
10:59 a.m. This is the time set for Default Hearing. Plaintiff is represented by counsels,
Kathryn A. Battock and Jessica J. Maceyko. Defendant, Magton, LLC is represented by counsel,
Jonathan A. Dessaules. Anthony Williams, Member of Defendant, Magton, LLC, is also present.
A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.
Counsel for Defendant presents the Court with a copy of Defendant’s Motion to Continue
Civil Default Hearing dated February 26, 2020.
Argument is heard regarding Defendant’s Motion to Continue Civil Default Hearing.
Based on the information presented and for the reasons stated on the record,
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion to Continue.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
02/27/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
Counsel for Plaintiff makes avowals to the Court.
Discussion is held.
Based on the information presented and for the reasons stated on the record,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED approving and settling the formal written Default
Judgment and Decree of Foreclosure and Order of Sale and Injunction against Magton, LLC signed
by the Court on February 27, 2020, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on February 27, 2020.
11:20 a.m. Matter concludes.
05/12/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 05/12/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
05/13/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
05/12/2020
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
W. Tenoever
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court is in receipt of Defendant Magton, L.L.C.’s Motion to Set Aside Default
Judgment and for New Trial Pursuant to Rule 59 (filed with the Court on March 12, 2020) and
Plaintiff Palm Terrace Condominium Association’s response and supplemental response objecting
to same. No Reply was filed. While oral argument was requested, the Court finds that neither oral
argument nor additional briefing would operate to benefit or aid the Court in addressing the issues
presented by Defendant’s Motion and, as such, oral argument is deemed unnecessary. It is further
noted that, as Plaintiff Palm Terrace Condominium Association (“PTCA”) argues, many (if not
all) of the arguments raised by Defendant Magton in its present Motion were previously addressed
by this Court when the Court, on February 27, 2020, entered Judgment by Default against
Defendant Magton and in favor of Plaintiff PTCA.
Nevertheless, Defendant Magton seeks an order pursuant to Rule 60(b), Arizona Rules of
Civil Procedure, setting aside the Default Judgment entered against it or an order pursuant to Rule
59 granting it a new trial. In addition, Magton requests in the alternative that this Court deem
portions of the Judgment “satisfied.”
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
05/12/2020
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
First, while Defendant Magton asserts that it has meritorious defenses to Plaintiff PTCA’s
Complaint, Defendant Magton (although properly served as required by Rule 4.1, Rules of Civil
Procedure) did not timely appear in response to PTCA’s Complaint in January 2020 and does not
offer any explanation as to why it failed to file a timely Answer or otherwise defend. Instead,
Defendant Magton argues that the Default Judgment is void because this Court lacked jurisdiction
to order foreclosure, as Magton had made a partial payment on the eve of the default hearing of
the monies PTCA claimed it was owed and had previously made repairs to the condominium unit
at issue. Notwithstanding Magton’s assertion, Magton, due to its failure to timely respond and
defend, was in default and, as a result, all of the facts alleged in PTCA’s Complaint were deemed
admitted by operation of Rule 55. Magton’s argument that it has evidence (most of which, the
Court notes, dates back to 2017 to 2019 – prior to PTCA’s Complaint – and none of which is newly
discovery) to dispute PTCA’s claims is misplaced due to Magton’s failure to timely respond and
defend.
Furthermore, where, as here, judgment is challenged as void, the defendant bears the
burden of demonstrating his entitlement to have the judgment set aside. Miller v. Nat’l Franchise
Servs., Inc., 167 Ariz. 403, 406, 807 P.2d 1139, 1142 (App. 1991). Only errors that undermine
jurisdiction render a judgment void for purposes of Rule 60(b)(4). See, Ezell v. Quon, 224 Ariz.
532, 537, 233 P.3d 645, 650 (App. 2010). Defendant Magton has shown no errors undermining
jurisdiction and, therefore, has failed to meet its burden.
Additionally, Defendant Magton’s argument, relying primarily upon the California case
Huntington Continental Townhouse Ass’n, Inc. v. Miner, 179 Cal.Rptr.3 47 (2014), that this Court
was divested of jurisdiction to order foreclosure as a result of Defendant Magton’s payment of
$5,850 toward the monies Plaintiff claimed it was owed flies in the face of A.R.S. § 33-1256.
A.R.S. § 33-1256 clearly and specifically states that a condominium association “has a lien on a
unit for any assessment levied against that unit from the time the assessment becomes due” and
that the
lien for assessments, for charges for late payment of those assessments, for
reasonable collection fees and for reasonable attorney fees and costs
incurred with respect to those assessments may be foreclosed…if the owner
has been delinquent in the payment of the monies secured by the lien…for
a period of one year or in the amount of $1,200 or more, whichever occurs
first, as determined on the date the action is filed.
A.R.S. § 33-1256(A). As alleged in Plaintiff PTCA’s Complaint and as argued by PTCA
at the February 27 default hearing and in response to Magton’s present Motion, Magton was
delinquent in paying monthly assessments for a period longer than a year and for an amount greater
than $1,200 when PTCA’s Complaint was filed. Plaintiff PTCA made a clear showing that it was
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
05/12/2020
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
entitled to foreclosure pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1256, including an award for reasonable attorney
fees and costs (as required by A.R.S. § 33-1256(H), and the same authority equipped this Court
with the jurisdiction to order foreclosure and to award the monies claimed by PTCA
notwithstanding Magton’s partial payment in the amount of $5,850 on February 26, 2020.
What’s more, the majority of Division One of the Court of Appeals, in Laveen Meadows
Homeowners Ass’n v. Mejia, recently addressed arguments very similar to those asserted by
Defendant Magton here in affirming the Superior Court in a case where the Court declined to set
aside a judgment by default as void pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4). In particular, the majority of the
Court of Appeals concluded that the California case Huntington Continental Townhouse Ass’n,
Inc. v. Miner was “unpersuasive” because Arizona law,1 unlike California Code § 5720, allows an
association “to sue to foreclose once the lien either exceeds $1,200 in unpaid assessments or is
delinquent for one year [, and] does not expressly eliminate the foreclosure remedy if [the] owner
makes a payment to reduce or eliminate the unpaid assessment balance.” See, Laveen Meadows
Homeowners Ass’n v. Mejia, ___ P.3d ___, *4, ¶ 15 (2020). Indeed, the majority noted, “the lien
created…expressly includes not only assessments but charges for late payment of those
assessments, reasonable collection fees and reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred with
respect to those assessments.” Id. Accordingly, for these reasons set forth herein and for the
reasons stated on the record at the February 27, 2020 default hearing, Defendant Magton’s
argument fails. So does Magton’s argument for a new trial or to have this Court deem portions of
the Default Judgment “satisfied” as Defendant Magton has presented no evidence, newly
discovered or otherwise, that it has completed or had others complete the work in its condominium
unit necessary to eliminate the threat of damage to the condominium unit located above its unit.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Magton, L.L.C.’s Motion requesting relief
pursuant to Rule 60(b), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, is DENIED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Magton, L.L.C.’s Motion requesting relief
pursuant to Rule 59, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, is DENIED; and
IT IS FURTHERE ORDERED that Defendant Magton, L.L.C.’s Motion requesting
portions of the February 27, 2020 Judgment be deemed “satisfied” is DENIED.
1 While A.R.S. § 33-1807 is the Arizona statute discussed in the Laveen Meadows Homeowners Ass’n v. Mejia case,
A.R.S. § 33-1256 and § 33-1807 have nearly identical language and, consequently, this Court concludes that the
principles discussed in Mejia equally apply in this case involving a condominium unit and that application of A.R.S.
§ 33-1256.
06/05/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 06/05/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/08/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
06/05/2020
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
J. Escarcega
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
This Court issued a Minute Entry Order on May 12, 2020 ruling on Defendant
Magton, L.L.C.’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment and for New Trial Pursuant to
Rule 59 noting that no Reply was filed in support of the Motion. Although docketed on
May 13, 2020, counsel for Defendant Magton, L.L.C. filed on May 12, 2020 a Joint Notice
of Second Extension of Time for Defendant to File Reply in Support of Motion to Set Aside
Default Judgment and for New Trial. No additional filing or request for relief by the parties
has been received by this Court in this matter after the Court’s May 12, 2020 ruling.
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken in response to the Joint Notice of
Second Extension of Time for Defendant to File Reply in Support of Motion to Set Aside
Default Judgment and for New Trial (filed on May 12, 2020); and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court’s ruling set forth in the May 12, 2020
Minute Entry Order is affirmed.
09/23/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 09/23/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/24/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
09/23/2020
Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling the formal written Order Authorizing Alternative
Service signed by the Court on September 22, 2020, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on September
23, 2020.
Please note: The court has signed a paper copy of the order. After the order has been
scanned and docketed by the Clerk of the Court, copies of this order, including certified, will be
available
through
the
ECR
online
at
www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov
or
through
www.AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals at the Clerk of Court’s offices
located throughout Maricopa County. More information on obtaining a certified copy of a court
document can be found at: www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/obtaining-records.
09/29/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 09/29/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/01/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
09/29/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom 105 - NER
11:00 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Hearing on Order to Show Cause. Plaintiff,
Palm Terrace Condominium Association, is represented by counsel, Kathryn Battock. Defendant,
Magton, LLC, is represented by counsel, Douglas M. Imperi, Jr., on behalf of counsel, Jonathan
A. Dessaules.
A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court is informed that Defendant filed a response to Plaintiff’s application for Order
to Show Cause on September 28, 2020, which the Court has not yet received.
Argument is heard.
Based on the information presented and for the reasons stated on the record,
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
09/29/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED directing Plaintiff to file a Reply by no later than 5:00 p.m. on
September 30, 2020.
Upon receipt of the Defendant’s Response and Plaintiff’s Reply, the Court will determine
whether another hearing is necessary in this matter or provide its ruling by minute entry.
11:18 a.m. Matter concludes.
10/05/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 10/05/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/06/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/05/2020
Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED setting an In-Person Evidentiary Hearing on October 15, 2020, at 1:30
p.m. before the before Honorable Gary L. Popham, Jr., Maricopa County Superior Court,
Northeast Regional Court Center, 18380 N. 40th Street, Courtroom 105, Phoenix AZ 85032.
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.
Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2020-79
requires all individuals entering a court facility to wear a mask or face covering at all times
they are in the court facility. With limited exceptions, the court will not provide masks or
face coverings. Therefore, any individual attempting to enter the court facility must have an
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/05/2020
Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 2
appropriate mask or face covering to be allowed entry to the court facility. Any person who
refuses to wear a mask or face covering as directed will be denied entrance to the court
facility or asked to leave. In addition, all individuals entering a court facility will be subject
to a health screening protocol. Any person who does not pass the health screening protocol
will be denied entrance to the court facility.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Representative of Defendant, Magton, LLC. shall
appear in person at the Evidentiary Hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before October 8, 2020, the parties shall
exchange by email any exhibits they intend to use at the hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before October 8, 2020, the parties shall provide
any exhibits they intend to use at the hearing to the Clerk’s Office in the following manner:
a. A party can submit them in person by going to a COC File Counter at any
facility. The party will pull a ticket from the kiosk for exhibit submittal, which will
notify Courtroom Services that someone is in the lobby with exhibits to drop off. A
representative from CRS will retrieve the exhibits and will we mark them as normal
to have ready for the hearing; or
b. A party can submit exhibits electronically by following the instructions on the COC
website
here:
https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/services/exhibits-
submission. The email shall include the case number, party submitting the
exhibits and the hearing date.
Please Note: Each exhibit must be separated by an Exhibit Slip Sheet to clearly
identify individual exhibits. If exhibits are not clearly separated, they will be
combined as one (1) document. Exhibits will be marked consecutively Plaintiff
first and then Defendant.
NOTICE: Exhibits Marked But Not Offered
Exhibits submitted to the Court for a trial/evidentiary hearing, whether through hard copy or by
electronic submission, that are marked as exhibits but are not offered into evidence during the
hearing, will be destroyed following the hearing, unless a party requests that the evidence be
returned at the conclusion of the hearing. Such requests must be filed with the Court and served
on all parties in advance of the hearing or by no later than the conclusion of the hearing.
10/07/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 10/07/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/08/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/07/2020
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
Based upon information relating to COVID,
IT IS ORDERED converting the In-Person Evidentiary Hearing set for October 15,
2020, at 1:30 p.m. before the Honorable Gary L. Popham to a virtual hearing using the
GoToMeeting platform. The link and information to connect to GoToMeeting is as follows:
Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/348563693
You can also dial in using your phone.
(For supported devices, tap a one-touch number below to join instantly.)
United States (Toll Free): 1 866 899 4679
- One-touch: tel:+18668994679,,348563693#
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/07/2020
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2
United States: +1 (571) 317-3116
- One-touch: tel:+15713173116,,348563693#
Access Code: 348-563-693
Join from a video-conferencing room or system.
Dial in or type: 67.217.95.2 or inroomlink.goto.com
Meeting ID: 348 563 693
Or dial directly: [email protected] or 67.217.95.2##348563693
New to GoToMeeting? Get the app now and be ready when your first meeting starts:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/install/348563693
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.
All other orders in the minute entry dated October 5, 2020, remain unchanged.
10/15/2020 — CV2019055035 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, PALM TERRACE 10/15/2020 HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR. View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/23/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/15/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE GARY L. POPHAM JR.
V. Burton
Deputy
PALM TERRACE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK
v.
MAGTON L L C
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
COMM. POPHAM
MINUTE ENTRY
Prior to the commencement of the hearing, Plaintiff’s Exhibits 1 through 4 and Defendant’s
Exhibits 5 through 22 were marked for identification.
Courtroom 105 – NER
1:29 p.m. This is the time for video conference Evidentiary Hearing regarding Plaintiff’s
Order to Show Cause filed on September 14, 2020. Plaintiff, Palm Terrace Condominium
Association, is represented by counsel, Kathryn A. Battock. Defendant, Magton, LLC, is
represented by counsel, Jonathan A. Dessaules. Counsel and potential witness for Defendant,
Douglas M. Imperi, Jr., is present. All respective counsel appear via the GoToMeeting platform.
A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held. Counsel for Defendant advises the Court that his client is having
technical issues. The Court will take a short recess for Defendant to resolve technical issues.
1:31 p.m. Court stands at recess.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/15/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
1:39 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel present. Anthony Williams, Member
of Defendant, Magton, LLC, is now present.
A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.
Counsel for Plaintiff informs the Court that the structural issue has been remedied.
Discussion is held regarding the issues remaining for the evidentiary hearing.
Counsel for Plaintiff stipulates to the admission of Defendant’s Exhibits 5 through 20 in
evidence.
Opening statements.
Plaintiff’s Case:
Gabriel Hernandez is sworn and testifies.
Counsel for Defendant stipulates to the admission of Plaintiff’s Exhibits 1 and 4 in
evidence.
Plaintiff’s Exhibits 1 and 4 are received in evidence.
Defendant’s Exhibits 5 through 20 are received in evidence.
Defendant’s Case:
Douglas M. Imperi, Jr. is sworn and testifies.
Anthony Williams is sworn and testifies.
2:54 p.m. Due to technical issues, Anthony Williams is present by audio only.
Anthony Williams testifies further.
Closing arguments.
Based on the information and testimony presented and for the reasons stated on the record,
THE COURT FINDS no evidence of conduct that rises to the level of contempt.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-055035
10/15/2020
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3
IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs.
There being no further need to retain the exhibits not offered or received in evidence in the
custody of the Clerk of Court,
IT IS ORDERED directing the Clerk to dispose of Plaintiff’s exhibits 2 and 3; and
Defendant’s exhibits 21 and 22 which were not offered or received in evidence.
ISSUED: Exhibit Disposal Form
3:23 p.m. Matter concludes.
