Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2005-091574: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Crescent Butte Homeowners Association.

Case Number

CV2005-091574

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

4/19/2005

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Driggs, Adam

Location

Southeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/09/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
01/08/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has in hand a letter signed by counsel for all parties requesting it vacate the
requirement that they complete a settlement conference and that the status conference currently
set for January 19, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. be vacated. Good cause appearing,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the order directing the parties to participate in the settlement
conference and vacating the January 19, 2007 status conference.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/01/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
01/31/2007
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received Plaintiff’s “Motion for Clarification of the Court’s Minute Entry
Dated November 19, 2006,” filed December 27, 2006, which the Court treats as a Motion for
Reconsideration.
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant shall file a response to the Motion by February 15,
2007.
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on Plaintiff’s Application in Support of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification for March 16, 2007 at 3:00
p.m. before:
THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
SOUTHEAST ADULT FACILITY
222 EAST JAVELINA
COURTROOM 207

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
01/31/2007
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
MESA AZ 85210
602-372-1164
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows:

Oral argument shall not exceed fifteen (15) 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.
PLEASE NOTE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION RE: CD/VIDEOTAPE
FEE CURRENTLY IN EFFECT
This is a JAVS courtroom. In the event a record is made, the Court will provide, upon
request, CDs and videotapes regardless of when the copies are made. A fee of $20.00 will apply
to all copies requested, either on the day of the hearing or for hearings recorded on an earlier
date. Forms to request a recording of a proceeding are available in the Self-Service Centers and
in the JAVS and FTR courtrooms.
If a party wants a court reporter to record a proceeding in this Court, a written request
must be filed at least 48 hours before the commencement of the proceedings.
A person requesting a daily copy CD or videotape must complete the appropriate request
form and pay the applicable fee at the Self-Service Center. Upon payment of the appropriate
fees through the Self-Service Center, a receipt will be issued which shall then be presented to
Court staff for preparation of the CD or videotape in the customary manner.
A person wanting a copy of a hearing from a previous occasion must contact Ken
Crenshaw at 602-506-7100.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
02/21/2006
Docket Code 023
Form J000
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
K. Stone
Deputy
FILED: 02/23/2006
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
Summary judgment practice is difficult and time consuming for both the Court and the
parties. It is also often expensive for the litigants. Summary judgment practice becomes even
more difficult when the party filing a Motion for Summary Judgment complicates matters by a
lack of patience. Such is the situation in the case at bar.
Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on December 23, 2005. This Motion was
supported by Exhibit C. Exhibit C is the beginning of an affidavit. However, the “affidavit” is
not signed and does even provide the name of the “affiant”. Under the circumstances, Defendant
was forced to file both a response and a “Motion for Additional Time Pursuant to Rule 56(f)”.
Defendant filed these pleadings on January 12, 2006. One day later, on January 13, the original
affidavit being relied on by Plaintiff was finally filed. This forced Defendant to file a “Motion to
Strike”.
On the surface, this situation is similar to a not uncommon practice. In Maricopa
County, Motions for Summary Judgment must be filed no later than 60 days before trial. In an
effort to meet the 60 day deadline, copies of affidavits (usually obtained by fax) are sometimes
submitted at the time of the filing of a Motion for Summary Judgment. Then, when the original
affidavit reaches counsel, it is filed under a notice.
The practice described in the forgoing paragraph is benign. Attorneys are officers of the
court. Opposing counsel can rely on the implied promise of the attorney who filed the Motion
for Summary Judgment that the original affidavit will soon be filed. Under such circumstances,
neither the party opposing the Motion for Summary Judgment nor the effective administration of
justice are prejudiced.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
02/21/2006
Docket Code 023
Form J000
Page 2
Although similar, the situation presented in this case is analytically distinguishable from
the scenario described above. First, the trial date has not yet been set in this case. Therefore,
Plaintiff’s counsel was not facing a deadline before which Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion
had to be filed.
Second, Plaintiff did not simply submit a copy of an affidavit. Rather, Plaintiff submitted
an unsigned affidavit. Further, the “affidavit” did not even provide the name of a person who
might ultimately sign the affidavit.
Third, the filing of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment started the clock ticking
toward a deadline for the filing of Defendant’s Response to the Motion. Failing to respond to a
summary judgment motion can result in a Court summarily granting the motion. Further, the
work involved in addressing a 20 page summary judgment motion 1 is a significant endeavor,
both for counsel and for the Court. It is time consuming enough to address the real issues.
Unfortunately, haste sometimes obscures the real issues and unnecessarily creates extra work for
all of those involved. Such is the case here. By prematurely filing Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment before obtaining a true affidavit, Plaintiff’s counsel caused much
unnecessary work. For example, in response to the situation created by Plaintiff, Defendant
reasonably (1) included argument in its response to the Motion for Summary Judgment regarding
the insuffiency of the “affidavit”, (2) filed a Motion for a Rule 56(f) extension, and (3) ultimately
filed a “Motion to Strike” the “affidavit”.
Under the circumstances and on Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED striking Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. This renders moot
Defendant’s “Motion for Additional Time Pursuant to Rule 56(f)” and Defendant’s “Motion to
Strike”.
In the event an attorney fee award is ultimately sought at the end of the case, counsel
should feel free to remind the Court of the unnecessary work done regarding Plaintiff’s Motion
for Summary Judgment.
DATED the 21st day of February, 2006.
/s/ HON. MARK F. ACETO
____________________________________________________
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

1 In this case, Plaintiff’s Motion was not only 20 pages long, but it also was supported by 20 voluminous exhibits.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/28/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
03/16/2007
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
3:26 p.m. This is the time set for oral argument Plaintiff’s Application in Support of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification. James Hazelwood participates
on behalf of Plaintiff. Eli Golob participates on behalf of Defendant.
A record of the proceedings is made by CD/videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held.
Counsel for Plaintiff shall provide a new proposed form of Judgment to include the
proper amounts.
4:05 p.m. Hearing concludes.
PLEASE NOTE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION RE: CD/VIDEOTAPE
FEE CURRENTLY IN EFFECT

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
03/16/2007
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
This is a JAVS courtroom. In the event a record is made, the Court will provide, upon
request, CDs and videotapes regardless of when the copies are made. A fee of $20.00 will apply
to all copies requested, either on the day of the hearing or for hearings recorded on an earlier
date. Forms to request a recording of a proceeding are available in the Self-Service Centers and
in the JAVS and FTR courtrooms.
If a party wants a court reporter to record a proceeding in this Court, a written request
must be filed at least 48 hours before the commencement of the proceedings.
A person requesting a daily copy CD or videotape must complete the appropriate request
form and pay the applicable fee at the Self-Service Center. Upon payment of the appropriate
fees through the Self-Service Center, a receipt will be issued which shall then be presented to
Court staff for preparation of the CD or videotape in the customary manner.
A person wanting a copy of a hearing from a previous occasion must contact Ken
Crenshaw at 602-506-7100.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/28/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
03/26/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney Fees and Costs.
The Court finds Plaintiff to be the prevailing, successful party and awards it $865.49 in
costs pursuant to A.R.S. §12-332 and §12-346.
The Court further awards Plaintiff attorney fees in the amount of $1,458.50 (the amount
incurred after Plaintiff’s first Motion for Summary Judgment was denied – see the Court’s
February 21, 2006 minute entry - and March 23, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
04/24/2006
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Brady
Deputy
FILED: 04/26/2006
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
On March 23, 2006, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Continue Matter on Inactive Calendar”.
IT IS ORDERED granting this motion. More specifically,
IT IS ORDERED continuing this case on the inactive calendar until June 15, 2006. If
Rule 38.1 is not complied with before that date, the case will be dismissed without further notice.
DATED this 24th day of April, 2006.
/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/27/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
04/26/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
DOCKET-CIVIL-SE
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Judgment against Defendant
Lily A. Hwa signed by the Court April 26, 2007 and filed (entered) by the clerk on April 26,
2007.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
07/24/2006
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Brady
Deputy
FILED: 07/25/2006
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
TELEPHONIC COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SET
A Motion to Set and Certificate of Readiness having been filed in this case,
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Comprehensive Pretrial Conference on September 8,
2006 at 9:30 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. 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.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
07/24/2006
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2
If a party is not represented by counsel, that party has all of the obligations that would
otherwise be the obligations of counsel.
E-COURTROOM POLICIES
This is a JAVS courtroom. In the event a record is made, the Court will provide, upon
request, CDs and videotapes regardless of when the copies are made. A fee of $20.00 will apply
to all copies requested, either on the day of the hearing or for hearings recorded on an earlier
date. Forms to request a recording of the proceeding are available in the Self-Service Center and
in the JAVS courtrooms.
A person requesting a daily copy of CD or videotape must complete the appropriate
request form and pay the applicable fee to the Self-Service Center. Upon payment of the
appropriate fees through the Self-Service Center, a receipt will be issued which shall then be
presented to Court staff for preparation of the CD or videotape in the customary manner.
A person wanting a copy of a hearing from a previous occasion must contact Ken
Crenshaw at 602-506-7100.
Should a party wish to have a court reporter present for trial, a written request must be
received by the Court ten (10) court business days prior to the scheduled hearing.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/11/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
09/08/2006
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
MINUTE ENTRY
9:36 a.m. In chambers. This is the time set for telephonic Comprehensive Pretrial
Conference. Elise Saadi participates telephonically on behalf of plaintiff. Melanie McKeddie
participates telephonically on behalf of defendant.
A Court Reporter is not present nor is an electronic recording being made of this hearing.
IT IS ORDERED imposing the following deadlines:
December 7, 2006
Rule 26.1 Disclosure regarding non-experts
December 7, 2006
Rule 26.1 Disclosure regarding expert witnesses
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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
09/08/2006
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2
conference. The judge pro tempore is requested to conduct a settlement conference not later than
December 19, 2006. The Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of
the settlement conference so please do not contact that office.
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 ORDERED setting this matter for a telephonic scheduling conference on January
19, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
NOTE: This division will place the conference call at the time of the hearing.
IT IS ORDERED lead counsel shall be present at the telephonic scheduling conference.
9:39 a.m. Hearing concludes.
PLEASE NOTE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION RE: CD/VIDEOTAPE
FEE CURRENTLY IN EFFECT
This is a JAVS courtroom. All CDs and videotapes will be provided by the Court,
regardless of when the copies are made. A fee of $20.00 will apply to all copies requested,
either on the day of the hearing or for hearings recorded on an earlier date. Forms to request a
recording of a proceeding are available in the Self-Service Centers and in the JAVS and FTR
courtrooms.
If a party wants a court reporter to record a proceeding in this Court, a written request
must be filed at least 48 hours before the commencement of the proceedings.
A person requesting a daily copy CD or videotape must complete the appropriate request
form and pay the applicable fee at the Self-Service Center. Upon payment of the appropriate
fees through the Self-Service Center, a receipt will be issued which shall then be presented to
Court staff for preparation of the CD or videotape in the customary manner.
A person wanting a copy of a hearing from a previous occasion must contact Ken
Crenshaw at 602-506-7100.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/29/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
11/27/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN
M. Brady
Deputy
CRESCENT BUTTE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
ELISE SAADI
v.
LILY A HWA
STEVEN W CHEIFETZ
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has before it Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed September 11,
2006 and the Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, filed October 17, 2006 and all
related pleadings. Initially, the Defendant concedes that she is indebted to Plaintiff for fines and
charges related to her violation of the CC&R’s in an amount of $1,453.75.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to this debt.
Defendant contends, in her cross-motion for summary judgment, that the $1,453.75 is
comprised of items which do not entitle Plaintiff to foreclosure as a remedy. The Court agrees.
From the record submitted by both parties, there is no genuine issue of material fact and
Defendant’s cross-motion for summary motion is appropriate as to Plaintiff’s claim for a lien for
the $1,453.75 debt.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment regarding its
claim for a lien and GRANTING Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment as to
Plaintiff's claim for a lien.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-091574
11/27/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff prepare a Proposed Form of Judgment within
30 days of the date this minute entry is filed.

Documents