Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2005-003790: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Foothills Community Association, The.

Case Number

CV2005-003790

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

3/3/2005

Case Type

Civil

Judge

McDowell, David

Location

Southeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

No parties captured.

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/15/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
01/14/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RICHARD J. TRUJILLO
D. Pluff
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
JENNIFER P NORE
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
BENJAMIN REEVES
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-CCC
RULING
RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL OR MOTION TO SET ASIDE
JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL AND REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AWARDING
ATTORNEY’S FEES
The Court having considered the Memoranda of Points and Authorities submitted by the
parties on the various issues presented; and having reviewed the file herein;
IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside Judgment of
Dismissal signed by the Court on November 2, 2007.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED entering an award of attorney’s fees to Plaintiff pursuant to
the Court’s ruling dated August 30, 2007, in the amounts consistent with the formal written

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
01/14/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
Judgment modified and signed by the Court on January 14, 2008, and filed (entered) by the Clerk
on January 14, 2008.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/15/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/13/2007
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Urge an Award of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs for
March 23, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. before:
THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 WEST JEFFERSON
5TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 512
PHOENIX AZ 85003
602-372-3081
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows:
No later than March 20, 2007, counsel shall provide copies of all cited cases in their
motion, response or reply, including Arizona cases, to the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/13/2007
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Oral argument shall not exceed five (5) minutes for each side. If extended oral argument
is necessary, counsel must so advise the Court no later than four (4) court days prior to the date
set for hearing so that oral argument can be rescheduled.

Any motion or stipulation for continuance must be filed with the Court no later than four
(4) court days prior to the date set for hearing. After that date, no continuances will be granted
except for extraordinary circumstances.

Counsel are advised that if the answering memorandum is not timely filed in accordance
with the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, oral argument may be vacated and the motion will be
ruled upon in accordance with Rule 7.1(b), A.R.C.P.
“E” Courtroom Technology – Policies and Information
Courtroom 512 is an “E” courtroom and provides for state of the art equipment for case
presentation and preservation of the record. Please note the following provisions.
1) DIGITAL RECORD PRESERVATION:
The official court record is preserved
digitally, via compact disc/dvd and videocassette in lieu of a court reporter. If parties or counsel
wish to have a court reporter present, the court must receive a written request at least 48 hours
prior to the hearing. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to
proceed without a court reporter. Note: If a court reporter is requested, the court reporter
becomes the official record.
2) COPIES OF THE RECORD:
For a record of digitally preserved proceedings,
contact Electronic Services (see contact information below). A fee is involved, depending on the
type and duration of recording you require. To request a copy you may visit, telephone or email
the court’s Electronic Services department (see information below). You will be asked to
provide the case number and case caption, the date of the proceeding(s), your name and
telephone number and whether the recording is being requested for purposes of appeal. For
same-day copies only, written request forms are provided at the Self Service Center (address
below). Note: Fees can only be taken at the Self Service Center.
3) CASE PRESENTATION: The court suggests that parties and counsel prepare the
case for presentation using the “E” courtroom technology. All document-type exhibits, i.e.
medical records, business records, photographs, etc., once scanned in a non-proprietary format,
can be presented electronically. Deposition testimony of witnesses who will not be present at
trial can be presented in video or DVD format.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/13/2007
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 3
4) TECHNOLOGY: All “E” courtroom technology will be ready for use upon arrival
of the parties. Do not attempt to set up the court equipment by yourself and do not unplug,
move, or in any way alter any of the equipment, microphones, cameras, etc. in the courtroom.
5) DEMONSTRATION
and
INSTRUCTIONS:
For
instructions
and/or
a
demonstration regarding use of the “E” courtroom technology, please contact Division Staff,
(602) 372-3180 at least five business days prior to your hearing or trial date.
(to process/place requests)
ELECTRONIC SERVICES
c/o KEN CRENSHAW at
CENTRAL COURT BUILDING
201 W. JEFFERSON ST.
13th FLOOR, STE 13B
’ (602) 506-3269 + e-mail
[email protected]
(for payment)
SELF SERVICE CENTER
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W. JEFFERSON ST.
1st FLOOR, LAW LIBRARY
’ (602) 506-7100

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/21/2006
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FILED: 02/23/2006
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
MINUTE ENTRY
IN CHAMBERS:
8:46 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff is
represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants are represented by counsel, Melanie C.
McKeddie. Both counsel appear telephonically.
Court Reporter, Rochelle Dobbins, is present.
The Court advises counsel of its findings regarding Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’
fees which was argued and taken under advisement on December 15, 2005. A follow-up minute
entry will be issued.
Discussion is held re: the counterclaim.
IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference for March 23, 2006 at 8:45
a.m., in this division, 602-372-3081. Counsel for Plaintiff is to initiate the telephone call.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the Inactive Calendar through
March 23, 2006.
8:52 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/23/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FILED: 02/28/2006
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees,
the Defendants/Counterclaimants’ Objection, the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Reply, the
Defendant/Counterclaimants’ Supplemental Briefing, and the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s
Supplemental Briefing.
As to the underlying Statement of Facts of the original Motion for Summary Judgment
which the Court deemed moot, the Court makes the following findings of undisputed fact for
purposes of determining the prevailing party:
1. At the time the motion was filed, Martin D. Lantry and Ciobie Lantry (the “Lantrys”)
were the owners of the residence in question.
2. At the time the motion was filed, the Lantry’s property was subject to certain
assessments, covenants and restrictions.
3. At the time the motion was filed, the Lantry’s property was part of a residential
community known as the Foothills.
4. The Foothills Community Association served as the homeowners’ association where the
Lantrys lived.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/23/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
5. On September 21, 2004, the Association notified the Lantrys that they were in violation
of the Association’s Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, namely:
a. Placement of an iron and wood bench in the center of the front yard without prior
written approval of the Association’s Design Review Committee.
b. Exposed irrigation lines and electrical conduits throughout the landscaping.
c. Installation of exterior lighting without written approval of the Design Review
Committee.
6. The Lantrys agreed to correct the violations, but failed to do as it had promised, even
after repeated requests from representatives of the Association to do so.
7. The Lantrys removed, but did not replace, some of the coach lights in the rear of the
residence, which resulted in sizable holes in the house and exposed electrical boxes.
8. At the time the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant filed its Complaint, the Lantrys had not
complied with the applicable Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions.
9. At the time the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant filed its Motion for Summary Judgment, the
Lantrys had not complied with the applicable Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions.
10. The Lantrys do not sufficiently dispute the Statement of Facts set forth in paragraphs 5-9
in a way that allows this Court to do anything other than treat those as matters of
uncontested fact.
The Court finds that, for purposes of the Motion for Summary Judgment, the Plaintiff
Foothills Community Association is the prevailing party on the motion.
The Court further finds that Defendants Lantrys are liable for the Association’s attorneys’
fees and costs pursuant to Article 15, Section 15.12, of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions.
The Court does not agree that it is appropriate to award $60,110.80, at least at this time,
for several reasons. First, the Court does not easily dismiss the argument that it may be
inappropriate, as a matter of equity, to award $60,000.00 in fees over a dispute which, if the
Association had engaged in self help and covered the expense of bringing the residence into
compliance, would be a fraction of the amount of attorneys’ fees. This is not to say that the
Association should have engaged in self help and waived its rights to seek injunctive relief,
instead, it is a way of comparing and contrasting the claimed amount of fees against the
estimation of what exactly is in controversy.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/23/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
Second, in making the determination, the Court should do so at a time when all claims
have been dispositively addressed, and not just the original Complaint being deemed moot.
Third, the Court has candidly expressed its concerns about having to ultimately sanction
the Lantry’s conduct in relation to A.R.S. §§12-349 and 12-350. The Lantrys have intimated that
the Association, and not the Lantrys, has acted in violation of those statutes. The consideration
of those statutes is most appropriately made at the conclusion of the case, when the Court can
weigh all of the factors, and hear everyone’s assessment and evaluation as to who should be
sanctioned, and why, if at all.

Fourth, the Court finds that it is more appropriate to consider an assessment of fees at the
conclusion of the case, as there may be claims of offsetting fees, under possible several theories,
in the event that the Defendants/Counterclaimants prevail on their Counterclaim.
Lastly, the Court finds that the hourly rate of $250.00 to be reasonable, and that the listed
amount of time accurately reflects the time expended on the professional services rendered.
IT IS ORDERED denying the application for attorneys’ fees without prejudice,
specifically for the Plaintiff to be able to re-urge upon the rendering of a verdict, final order or
judgment on the Counterclaim.
Lastly, Defendants/Counterclaimants’ counsel has repeatedly demonstrated what the
Court considers sharp practice. If counsel chooses to disparage opposing counsel, or interrupt
the Court during oral argument, or use pleadings or podiums as a pretext to demean and insult
others, counsel is forewarned that each additional instance of misconduct will result in a sanction
of $1,000 against the Lantrys. Everyone is forewarned.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/02/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
02/28/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received and reviewed Defendants/Counterclaimants’ Request for
Extension to File Their Reply to The Foothills Community Association’s Response to the
Lantry’s Cross-Motion for Attorney’s Fees.
IT IS ORDERED granting said request and the Lantrys shall have until February 28,
2007 to file their reply.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/08/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/06/2007
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
ORAL ARGUMENT VACATED AND RESET
On Court's own motion,
IT IS ORDERED vacating oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Urge an Award of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs set for
March 23, 2007 and resetting same for March 27, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. before:
THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 WEST JEFFERSON
5TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 512
PHOENIX AZ 85003
602-372-3081
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no later than March 22, 2007, counsel shall provide
copies of all cited cases in their motion, response or reply, including Arizona cases, to the Court.
“E” Courtroom Technology – Policies and Information

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/06/2007
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 2
Courtroom 512 is an “E” courtroom and provides for state of the art equipment for case
presentation and preservation of the record. Please note the following provisions.
1) DIGITAL RECORD PRESERVATION:
The official court record is preserved
digitally, via compact disc/dvd and videocassette in lieu of a court reporter. If parties or counsel
wish to have a court reporter present, the court must receive a written request at least 48 hours
prior to the hearing. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to
proceed without a court reporter. Note: If a court reporter is requested, the court reporter
becomes the official record.
2) COPIES OF THE RECORD:
For a record of digitally preserved proceedings,
contact Electronic Services (see contact information below). A fee is involved, depending on the
type and duration of recording you require. To request a copy you may visit, telephone or email
the court’s Electronic Services department (see information below). You will be asked to
provide the case number and case caption, the date of the proceeding(s), your name and
telephone number and whether the recording is being requested for purposes of appeal. For
same-day copies only, written request forms are provided at the Self Service Center (address
below). Note: Fees can only be taken at the Self Service Center.
3) CASE PRESENTATION: The court suggests that parties and counsel prepare the
case for presentation using the “E” courtroom technology. All document-type exhibits, i.e.
medical records, business records, photographs, etc., once scanned in a non-proprietary format,
can be presented electronically. Deposition testimony of witnesses who will not be present at
trial can be presented in video or DVD format.
4) TECHNOLOGY: All “E” courtroom technology will be ready for use upon arrival
of the parties. Do not attempt to set up the court equipment by yourself and do not unplug,
move, or in any way alter any of the equipment, microphones, cameras, etc. in the courtroom.
5) DEMONSTRATION
and
INSTRUCTIONS:
For
instructions
and/or
a
demonstration regarding use of the “E” courtroom technology, please contact Division Staff,
(602) 372-3180 at least five business days prior to your hearing or trial date.
(to process/place requests)
ELECTRONIC SERVICES
c/o KEN CRENSHAW at
CENTRAL COURT BUILDING
201 W. JEFFERSON ST.
(for payment)
SELF SERVICE CENTER
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W. JEFFERSON ST.
1st FLOOR, LAW LIBRARY

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/06/2007
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 3
13th FLOOR, STE 13B
’ (602) 506-3269 + e-mail
[email protected]
’ (602) 506-7100

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/23/2006
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FILED: 03/27/2006
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
GARY L LASSEN
DOCKET-CIVIL-CCC
CONTINUE ON INACTIVE CALENDAR
IN CHAMBERS:
8:49 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff is
represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants are represented by counsel, Melanie C.
McKeddie. Counterdefendant The Foothills Community Association is represented by counsel,
Gary L. Lassen. All counsel appear telephonically.
Court Reporter, Rochelle Dobbins, is present.
The Court has received a Stipulation for Substitution of Counsel for Counterdefendant.
The Court is advised that counsel, Bob J. McCullough, will represent The Foothills
Community Association as Plaintiff in this case and Garry L. Lassen will represent The Foothills
Community Association as Counterdefendant in this case.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED allowing Gary L. Lassen and Meagher & Geer, P.L.L.P. to be
substituted as counsel for Counterdefendant, The Foothills Community Association, in the
counterclaim, in place and instead of Bob J. McCullough and the law firm of Snell & Wilmer.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/23/2006
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 2
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Bob J. McCullough does not need to be part of
the certified mailing for each and every pleading and document filed by the parties in this case
except and unless it pertains to the issue of attorney’s fees raised on behalf of The Foothills
Community Association as Plaintiff.
Discussion is held re: scheduling.
IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall confer and submit a stipulated scheduling order.
Said stipulated order shall include, but not be limited to, the follow:
•
A request for a status conference date
•
A request for a judge pro tem through the Court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution
Office or advise if private mediation and a deadline for the mediation
•
A deadline for the filing of dispositive motions
If the parties select a private mediator, a deadline for the mediation should be selected at
least 90 days from the date of the filing of the dispositive motions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the Inactive Calendar through
September 29, 2006.
8:55 a.m. Matter concludes.
LATER:
IT IS ORDERED that the stipulated scheduling order shall be submitted to the Court no
later than April 14, 2006.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/29/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
03/27/2007
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEWART F GROSS
MATTERS TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT
9:32 a.m. This is the time set for oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Urge an
Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and
Costs. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants are represented by
counsel, Stewart F. Gross.
A recording of this proceeding is made by CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Oral argument is presented.
IT IS ORDERED taking these matters under advisement.
10:28 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/12/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
04/10/2007
Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEWART F GROSS
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has taken Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Urge an Award of Attorneys’ Fees and
Costs and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs under advisement. The
Court has considered the briefing and argument made in connection with the parties varied
requests for attorney’s fees.
The Court finds from the evidence, that the Lantrys defended a claim without substantial
justification, in violation of A.R.S. §12-349(A)(1).
The Court further finds that the Lantry’s conduct defended the claim solely for purposes
of harassment, in violation of A.R.S.§12-349(A)(2).
The Court further finds that the Lantry’s conduct initiated, unreasonably expanded, and
unreasonably delayed these proceedings, in violation of A.R.S. §12-349(A)(3).
The Court further finds that Martin D. Lantry’s affidavit, regarding the holdback
provisions of his escrow account for the residence in question, was filed with this Court in
violation of Civil Rule 11.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
04/10/2007
Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 2
These finding are preliminary, and are made for the purposes of setting the parameters of
the evidentiary hearing the Court will hear pursuant to A.R.S.§12-349(B) to determine
apportionment of attorney’s fees and sanctions, and also, the consideration of sanctions pursuant
to Civil Rule 11. Mr. Lantry and Mr. Cheifetz are to be in attendance. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for an Evidentiary Hearing on May 31, 2007 at
10:00 a.m. (time allotted: 2 hours), in this division.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall simultaneously file briefs with the
Court no later than May 25, 2007. Said briefs shall not exceed twenty (20) pages.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any exhibits that need to be marked for identification
for the hearing shall be submitted to the Clerk of this Division (602-372-3180) no later than
12:00 p.m. on May 29, 2007. All hearing exhibits shall have been exchanged prior to that time.
No duplicate exhibits shall be presented for marking. Please DO NOT place exhibits in a
notebook when submitting them to the Court.
Please do not leave exhibits in the division’s “in” box.
Each exhibit shall be stapled. If an exhibit is too large to be stapled, that exhibit shall be
securely fastened in order to prevent page separation during witness review. (Note: Black
binder clips are NOT considered securely fastened. I suggest you use the silver two-prong
fasteners). If either party fails to comply with the steps for marking exhibits, that party’s
exhibits may be precluded from being marked at the hearing. Please call the Clerk of this
Division if you have any questions or need clarification.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/20/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
04/18/2007
Docket Code 088
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEWART F GROSS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
This Court having been assigned to the criminal calendar as of April 10, 2007,
IT IS ORDERED transferring this matter to the Honorable Edward O. Burke for all
further proceedings.1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Evidentiary Hearing set for May 31, 2007
before Judge Ryan, to be reset before Judge Burke.
cc: Judge Burke

1 Judge Burke is located at the Old Courthouse, 125 W. Washington, 1st Floor, Courtroom 103, Phoenix, AZ, 602-
506-6538.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
04/30/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
04/25/2007
Docket Code 088
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEWART F GROSS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-CCC
JUDGE BURKE
JUDGE TRUJILLO
MINUTE ENTRY
On April 18, 2007, the Court issued a minute entry through which it, among other things,
transferred “this matter to the Honorable Edward O. Burke for all further proceedings.”
IT IS ORDERED vacating the above quoted transfer order.
The Court notes the following:
•
This case remains assigned to court calendar CVJ05.
•
This case is temporarily assigned to the Honorable Edward O. Burke.
This temporary assignment will remain in effect through June 22, 2007.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
04/25/2007
Docket Code 088
Form V000A
Page 2
•
Absent further order, the Honorable Richard J. Trujillo will assume
responsibility for court calendar CVJ05 and for this case effective June 25,
2007.
/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
05/07/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
05/03/2007
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
W. Yank
FOR HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEWART F GROSS
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED setting an Evidentiary Hearing for July 9, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. before
Judge Trujillo.
Judge Trujillo will be assigned to this calendar on June 25, 2007. Until that date
you may contact Judge Burke’s division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

05/25/2005

Docket Code 066
Form V066A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. JONATHAN H. SCHWARTZ
D. Glab

Deputy

FILED: 05/26/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MARTIN D LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

JUDGE DOWNIE

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF JUDGE

A Notice of Change of Judge dated May 19, 2005 having been received,

IT IS ORDERED transferring this case from Judge Jonathan H. Schwartz to the Presiding
Civil Department Judge for reassignment. Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is
pending.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

06/07/2005

Docket Code 066
Form V066A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARGARET H. DOWNIE
L. Rasmussen

Deputy

FILED: 06/10/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MARTIN D LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

CIOBIE S LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Jonathan H. Schwartz. A Notice of
Change of Judge has been filed by defendants. The case was transferred to the Presiding Civil
Judge for reassignment.

IT IS ORDERED that this case be assigned to Civil Calendar CVJ05, the Honorable J.
Richard Gama, for all further proceedings. If any objections to the Notice of Change of Judge
are filed, the noticed judge retains jurisdiction to hear and decide the objections. Any objections
must be filed and a copy delivered to the noticed judge within twenty days of the date of this
order.

Pending: See attached coversheet. Pending matters will be affirmed or reset by the
newly assigned division.

cc: Judge Gama

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

06/16/2005

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE J. RICHARD GAMA
S. Brown

Deputy

FILED: 06/23/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MARTIN D LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

CIOBIE S LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET

The Court having received this case on reassignment,

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for Comprehensive Pretrial Scheduling Conference
on August 19, 2005 at 1:45 p.m. in this division.

HONORABLE J. RICHARD GAMA
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
MARICOPA COUNTY
101 WEST JEFFERSON
EAST COURT BUILDING, 6TH FLOOR
COURTROOM/SUITE 611
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
602-506-1245

The Court has set aside 15 minutes for this conference. If all counsel feel significantly
more or less time is required for the Conference, the Court should be notified immediately.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

06/16/2005

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2

All counsel are directed to meet personally no later than 10 days prior to the Pretrial
Conference, with their respective calendars, to discuss all of the matters set forth in Rules 16(a)
and (b), A.R.C.P. Counsel shall prepare and file with the Court no later than 5 days prior to
the Pretrial Conference, with a copy delivered to this division, a Joint Pretrial Statement
addressing the following items (due date: August 12, 2005):

1.
An agreed-upon schedule for completion of discovery and a list of all discovery
that has been completed through August 19, 2005. 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 simultaneous disclosure of expert witnesses.

3.
A date or dates for the disclosure of all non-expert witnesses.

4.
The number of additional non-uniform interrogatories requested by each party and
the reasons for the requests.

5.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 A.R.C.P. time limits
should be waived.

6.
A proposed date for a Mandatory Settlement Conference pursuant to Rule 16.1,
A.R.C.P.

7.
An agreed-upon date for compliance with Rule 16(d), A.R.C.P.

8.
A proposed trial date agreed upon by all counsel.

If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items in the Pretrial Statement, the reasons
for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Pretrial Statement.

Counsel are reminded that the Court will impose sanctions against counsel and/or their
clients for failure to participate in good faith in the Pretrial Statement for the Pretrial Conference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
06/29/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FILED: 07/03/2006
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
GARY L LASSEN
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
REFERAL TO ADR
The parties having stipulated to a settlement conference through the Alternative Dispute
Resolution Office,
IT IS ORDERED that 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 no later than September 15, 2006. The Office of Alternative Dispute
Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not contact that
office.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

07/14/2005

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE J. RICHARD GAMA
S. Brown

Deputy

FILED: 07/19/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MARTIN D LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

CIOBIE S LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received Plaintiff/Counterdefendant The Foothills Community
Association’s (1) Motion to Compel Defendants to Comply with Rules of Service 5(a), 5(c), 5(g)
and 7.1 and Rule 26.1 and (2) Motion for the Court to Abstain from Ruling Upon Defendants’
Motions filed May 26 and June 2 Until Defendants Serve the Motions and the Association
Responds.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s motion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendants shall comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure,
5(a), 5(c), 5(g), 7.1 and 26.1.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendants shall file a disclosure statement within 20 days.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

07/15/2005

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE J. RICHARD GAMA
S. Brown

Deputy

FILED: 07/19/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MARTIN D LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

CIOBIE S LANTRY
814 E MOUNTAIN SAGE DR
PHOENIX AZ 85048

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and considered Defendants/Counterclaimants’ Motion for
Extension of Time Within Which to Respond to Plaintiff/Counterdefendant The Foothills
Community Association’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and the responsive pleading.

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants/Counterclaimants’ Motion for Extension of Time.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendants shall have through July 15, 2005 to file a
response.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
07/18/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FILED: 07/20/2006
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
GARY L LASSEN
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
REFER TO ADR
Pursuant to the Scheduling Order signed by the Court on July 17, 2006,
IT IS ORDERED that 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 no later than October 27, 2006. The Office of Alternative Dispute
Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not contact that
office.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/14/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
08/13/2007
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RICHARD J. TRUJILLO
D. Pluff
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
BRAD K KEOGH
MINUTE ENTRY
Prior to commencement of trial, Plaintiff’s exhibits 1 through 51 inclusive are marked for
identification.
10:00 a.m. This is the time set for an Evidentiary Hearing re: apportionment of attorney’s
fees and sanctions. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants Martin D.
Lantry, Ciobie S. Lantry and their counsel Steven W. Cheifetz are represented by counsel, Brad K.
Keogh.
Court Reporter, Lori Fraley, is present and a record of the proceedings is made by audio
and/or videotape.
Arguments are presented regarding the issues of the case.
Martin Lantry is sworn and testifies.
Upon stipulation, Plaintiff’s exhibits 1 through 51 are received in evidence.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
08/13/2007
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.
The Court finds for reasons set forth on the record, Defendant Martin D. Lantry is not
subject to any sanctions by this court.
12:01 p.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

08/22/2005

Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE J. RICHARD GAMA
S. Brown

Deputy

FILED: 08/25/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ

CIOBIE S LANTRY
48018 N 27TH AVE
NEW RIVER AZ 85087-8090

STATUS CONFERENCE/ORAL ARGUMENT SET
CONTINUED ON INACTIVE CALENDAR

Upon review of the pretrial memorandums provided by counsel,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the status conference set on August 19, 2005.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting the Motion for Extension of Time for Plaintiff to
file its reply to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and setting a pretrial status
conference and oral argument for November 4, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. at which time all motions
shall be fully briefed and ready for argument.

Any motion or stipulation for continuance must be filed with the Court no later than
4 Court days prior to the date set for hearing. After that date, no continuances will be granted
except for extraordinary circumstances.

All memoranda and affidavits regarding the motion must be filed and copies lodged with
this division no later than 4 Court days prior to the date set for hearing.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

08/22/2005

Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 2

Counsel are advised that if the answering memorandum is not timely filed in accordance
with the Arizona Rules Of Civil Procedure, oral argument may be vacated and the motion will be
ruled upon in accordance with Rule 7.1 (b), A.R.C.P.

All counsel are directed to meet personally no later than 10 days prior to the Pretrial
Conference, with their respective calendars, to discuss all of the matters set forth in Rules 16(a)
and (b), A.R.C.P. Counsel shall prepare and file with the Court no later than 5 days prior to the
pretrial conference, with a copy delivered to this division, a Joint Pretrial Statement
addressing at least the following items (due date: October 28, 2005):

1.
An agreed-upon schedule for completion of discovery and a list of all discovery
that has been completed through November 4, 2005. 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 simultaneous disclosure of expert witnesses.

3.
A date or dates for the disclosure of all non-expert witnesses.

4.
The number of additional non-uniform interrogatories requested by each party and
the reasons for the requests.

5.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 A.R.C.P. time limits
should be waived.

6.
A proposed date for a mandatory settlement conference pursuant to Rule 16.1,
A.R.C.P.

7.
An agreed-upon date for compliance with Rule 16(d), A.R.C.P.

8.
A proposed trial date agreed upon by all counsel.

If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items in the Pretrial Statement, the reasons
for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Pretrial Statement.

Counsel are reminded that the Court will impose sanctions against counsel and/or their
clients for failure to participate in good faith in the Pretrial Statement for the pretrial conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the inactive calendar through and
including November 4, 2005.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/04/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
08/30/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RICHARD J. TRUJILLO
D. Pluff
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
BRAD K KEOGH
RULING
RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REURGE AN AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND
COSTS
In February, 2006, the Court ruled that the Plaintiff was the prevailing party on Plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment. However, the Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees and
Costs was denied pending a resolution of the Defendants’ Counterclaim.
A settlement of the Counterclaim, in the sum of $20,000.00, in favor of the Defendants
was entered on or about November 1, 2006.
The parties apparently had a fairly contentious ten year history prior to the filing of the
Complaint. In any event, in October 2004, the Defendants were advised that item (3) “ground
cover to hide the irrigation and electric lines”, item (5) “tack down cable on west side of wall”
and item (6) “plastic covers or shields on inside of coach lights in rear yard so light will not
emanate to side and toward neighbors” needed to be completed in order to avoid legal action by
the Plaintiff.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
08/30/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
During the course of the next six months or so, the legal action by the Plaintiff was swift
and steady even though the Defendants advised the Plaintiff in October, 2004, that their home
was on the market and believed the home would not sell unless all CC&R requirements were
completed.
On July 14, 2005, the home sold. Therefore, the Defendants contend, the issues
presented in the Complaint became “moot” as a matter of fact and law on July 14, 2005.
Prior to the close of escrow, on July 8, 2005, Plaintiff, through counsel, proposed a
settlement of all issues, including the Defendants’ Counterclaim, for the total sum of $20,843.30,
in favor of the Plaintiff. This sum apparently represented Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees and costs
incurred through July 8, 2005.
Plaintiff is now requesting attorney’s fees and costs in excess of $75,000.00.
This Court has carefully reviewed 52 written exhibits containing letters, emails,
pleadings, transcripts and photographs; literally hundreds of pages over seven inches thick.
Clearly, this case, the Complaint and Counterclaim, should have been presented to a
settlement judge or mediator as suggested by the Defendants when they were pro per and by
Defendants’ counsel, after they were retained, in July 2005.
Given the nature of the allegations brought by the Defendants in their Counterclaim, and
the position of the Plaintiff that the Counterclaim was “frivolous” and “without merit”, and
further, the apparent unwillingness of the Plaintiff to pursue a resolution via a settlement or
mediation process,
IT IS ORDERED awarding the Plaintiff $20,843.30, as and for attorney’s fees and costs.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/12/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
10/10/2006
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
KURT M ZITZER
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
CONTINUE ON INACTIVE CALENDAR
AND
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
IN CHAMBERS:
9:09 a.m. This is the time set for a Pretrial Conference. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, Kurt M. Zitzer. Defendants are represented by counsel, Melanie C. McKeddie. Both
counsel appear telephonically.
A court reporter is not present.
Discussion is held re: Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
There being no objection,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a reply no later than October 27, 2006.
Counsel shall provide copies of all cited cases, including Arizona cases, attached to the Court’s

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
10/10/2006
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 2
copy of the reply. Counsel shall deliver the reply, with the attached cites, directly to this
Division’s Judicial Assistant, Stephenie Ball.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment for October 30, 2006 at 3:30 p.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes), in this
division.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the Inactive Calendar through
October 30, 2006.
9:15 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/26/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
10/24/2006
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
MELANIE C MCKEDDIE
KURT M ZITZER
INACTIVE CALENDAR
A Notice of Settlement has been received.
IT IS ORDERED placing this matter on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal on
November 27, 2006 as to the counterclaim only without further notice unless, prior to said
date, Judgment is entered or filed, a Stipulation for Dismissal is presented, or a Motion to Set and
Certificate of Readiness is filed.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
11/06/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-003790
11/02/2007
Docket Code 047
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RICHARD J. TRUJILLO
D. Pluff
Deputy
FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH
v.
MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This case was on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal on August 12, 2007, unless
specified action was taken before a certain date. The date has passed, and no action has been
taken.
IT IS ORDERED dismissing this case without prejudice for lack of prosecution.
/s/ Richard J. Trujillo
________________________
Richard J. Trujillo
Judge of the Superior Court

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

11/04/2005

Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
K. Ballard

Deputy

FILED: 11/08/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ

HEARING/ORAL ARGUMENT CONTINUED

4:14 p.m. This is the time set for Pretrial Conference and Oral Argument re: Plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Plaintiff is
represented by Bob J. McCullough, and Defendants are represented by Steven W. Cheifetz and
Melanie C. McKeddie.

Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.

Oral argument is presented on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT due to the hour, the hearing will be continued to another
date.

5:11 p.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

IT IS ORDERED tentatively continuing Oral Argument (re: Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings) and the Pretrial Conference to
Wednesday, November 9, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. in this division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

11/04/2005

Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 2

Counsel are directed to contact the Court’s Judicial Assistant on Monday, November 7,
2005 to confirm the foregoing date.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

11/09/2005

Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro

Deputy

FILED: 11/11/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ

LAWRENCE W PHELPS

MINUTE ENTRY

4:01 p.m. This is the time set for continued oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment and Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and a Pretrial Conference.
Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants are represented by counsel,
Steven W. Chiefetz and Melanie C. McKeddie. Defendant Martin D. Lantry is present.
Lawrence W. Phelps, counsel for Capital Title Agency, Inc. (not a party in this action), is
present.

Court Reporter, Rochelle Dobbins, is present.

Oral argument is presented on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

Defendants advise the Court that they have withdrawn their Motion for Summary
Judgment.

Defendants clarify the issue regarding their Motion to Release Funds.

Oral argument is presented on Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

For the reasons set forth on the record,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

11/09/2005

Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the injunctive requests for relief of both parties
as to the release of proceeds.

The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is treated as a Motion to Strike.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Strike.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED allowing Defendants/Counterclaimants leave to amend
their counterclaim. Said amended counterclaim shall be filed no later than November 29, 2005.

Although the summary judgment is denied, Plaintiff’s counsel is invited to submit an
application for attorneys’ fees with legal analysis as to why notwithstanding the motion being
moot, there is an entitlement to attorneys’ fees under the Homeowners’ Association under A.R.S.
§12-341(a) and (c), as well as §12-349 and §12-350.

The Court makes a record regarding repair issues.

A pretrial conference is conducted.

IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees
for December 15, 2005 at 9:15 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the Inactive Calendar through
December 15, 2005.

FILED: Affidavit of James Goers; Holdback Instructions

4:52 p.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2005-003790

12/15/2005

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. RYAN
B. Navarro

Deputy

FILED: 12/19/2005

FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
THE
BOB J MCCULLOUGH

v.

MARTIN D LANTRY, et al.
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ

MATTER TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT

9:38 a.m. This is the time set for oral argument on Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’
Fees. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Bob J. McCullough. Defendants are represented by
counsel, Steven W. Chiefetz. Defendant Martin D. Lantry is present.

Court Reporter, Rochelle Dobbins, is present.

Oral argument is presented.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference for February 21, 2006 at
8:45 a.m., in this division, 602-372-3081. Counsel for Plaintiff is to initiate the telephone call.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall file their supplement brief
regarding Defendants’ selective enforcement and whether or not the Court can rely on the
parties’ Statements of Fact no later than January 13, 2006.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file their rebuttal brief no later than
January 27, 2006.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

10:40 a.m. Matter concludes.

Documents