09/16/2008 — CV2008006132 ASSOCIATION, LANDINGS HOMEOWNERS 09/16/2008 HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/18/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-006132
09/16/2008
Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LANDINGS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
CHANDLER W TRAVIS
v.
WAYNE Y TSUCHIMOTO
RULING
CASE DISMISSED
The Court has considered the Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time for Service, pursuant to ARCP
Rule 4 (i), filed September 5, 2008. The Court finds that the plaintiff has not demonstrated the
exercise of due diligence in trying to secure service on the defendant.
On June 27, 2008, Plaintiff filed his first Motion to Extend Time for Service. The Court then
ordered that service be extended until August 30, 2008. In the June 27, 2008 Motion, Plaintiff
said that a private investigator had been hired and Plaintiff needed an extension of time to serve
defendant at a different address. In the Plaintiff’s September 5, 2008 Motion, he claims that he
must serve defendant Tsuchimoto by publication. No explanation of efforts made and findings
discovered by the private investigator have been made to the Court. The Court finds that, without
more, these statements are not good cause to extend the time for service. IT IS ORDERED
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S UNTIMELY (filed September 5, 2008, deadline for service was
August 30, 2008) MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AND DISMISSING THE
COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT WAYNE Y. TSUCHIMOTO WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
10/01/2008 — CV2008006132 ASSOCIATION, LANDINGS HOMEOWNERS 10/01/2008 HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/06/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-006132
10/01/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LANDINGS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
CHANDLER W TRAVIS
v.
WAYNE Y TSUCHIMOTO
WAYNE Y TSUCHIMOTO
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
RULING
The Court received Motion for Substitution of Counsel filed September 24, 2008. This
case was dismissed without prejudice on September 16, 2008, for failure to timely serve
defendant (See attached minute entry of 9/16/08.) Therefore, the Court denies Motion for
Substitution of Counsel as moot.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that the attached Minute Entry dated September 16,
2008 is as follows:
RULING
CASE DISMISSED
The Court has considered the Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time for Service, pursuant to ARCP
Rule 4 (i), filed September 5, 2008. The Court finds that the plaintiff has not demonstrated the
exercise of due diligence in trying to secure service on the defendant.
On June 27, 2008, Plaintiff filed his first Motion to Extend Time for Service. The Court then
ordered that service be extended until August 30, 2008. In the June 27, 2008 Motion, Plaintiff
said that a private investigator had been hired and Plaintiff needed an extension of time to serve
defendant at a different address. In the Plaintiff’s September 5, 2008 Motion, he claims that he
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-006132
10/01/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
must serve defendant Tsuchimoto by publication. No explanation of efforts made and findings
discovered by the private investigator have been made to the Court. The Court finds that, without
more, these statements are not good cause to extend the time for service. IT IS ORDERED
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S UNTIMELY (filed September 5, 2008, deadline for service was
August 30, 2008) MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AND DISMISSING THE
COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT WAYNE Y. TSUCHIMOTO WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
