06/02/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 06/02/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/03/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/02/2014
Docket Code 046
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED setting Hearing on Objection to Garnishment filed by the Judgment
Debtor on June 11, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., in this division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 005
Phoenix, AZ 85003
LET THE RECORD SHOW that notification of the above hearing is given to:
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/02/2014
Docket Code 046
Form V000A
Page 2
Judgment Creditor via email and minute entry;
Judgment Debtor via telephone and minute entry.
06/12/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 06/12/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/13/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/12/2014
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom: OCH 001.
9:54 a.m. This is the time set for Garnishment Objection Hearing. Counsel, Thomas
Burke, is present on behalf of Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor. Katherine Bruggeman, statutory
agent for Cimros, Inc., is present on her own behalf.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding Cimros, Inc.’s relationship to Defendant/Judgment Debtor,
Mutual Management Services, Inc., and Ms. Bruggeman’s appearance at today’s hearing.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/12/2014
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 2
Katherine Bruggeman is sworn.
IT IS ORDERED joining Cimros, Inc. as a third party in this garnishment proceeding.
THE COURT FINDS that given Ms. Bruggeman’s appearance today as president and
statutory agent, Cimros, Inc. has received adequate notice of its joinder as a third party.
Ms. Bruggeman is advised that pursuant to Rule 31 of the Supreme Court Rules of
Procedure, a corporation must be represented by an attorney licensed in the State of Arizona.
To allow Judgment Debtor time to attempt to obtain legal counsel,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing today’s Garnishment Objection Hearing to June
23, 2014 at 2:30 p.m., in this Division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 005
Phoenix, AZ 85003
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Garnishee, U.S. Bank, shall continue to withhold funds
pursuant to the garnishment until further court order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that parties shall exchange any exhibits by the close of
business, June 20, 2014.
10:20 a.m. Matter concludes.
06/12/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 06/12/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/13/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/12/2014
Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Order Continuing Hearing Re:
Objection to Garnishment, as signed by the Court on June 10, 2014 and filed by the clerk on June
12, 2014.
Pursuant to State Rule 5(j)(2), the Clerk’s office is required to notify all parties when an
order is signed by the Court, either by mailing a conformed copy, or by minute entry. No copies
or envelopes having been submitted, notice is hereby given via minute entry.
06/18/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 06/18/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/19/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/18/2014
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
MINUTE ENTRY
On the Court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED resetting the Garnishment Objection Hearing scheduled for June 23,
2014 at 2:30 p.m. to June 23, 2014 at 1:30 p.m., in this division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 005
Phoenix, AZ 85003
06/23/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 06/23/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/25/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/23/2014
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
LOREN R UNGAR
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom: OCH 005.
1:34 p.m. This is the time set for continued Garnishment Objection Hearing.
Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor is represented by counsel, Thomas Burke. Defendant/Judgment
Debtor, Cimros, Inc., is represented by counsel, Loren Ungar.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
06/23/2014
Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 2
Defendant/Judgment Debtor may file a motion regarding its jurisdictional objection to the
underlying judgment by the close of business, June 30, 2014. Any response shall be filed by the
close of business, July 3, 3014. Any reply shall be filed by 9:00 a.m. on July 7, 2014.
IT IS ORDERED continuing this matter to July 7, 2014 at 1:30 p.m., in this division:
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Court House
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 001
Phoenix, AZ 85003
1:55 p.m. Matter concludes.
07/07/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 07/07/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/08/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/07/2014
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Stulz
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
LOREN R UNGAR
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom: OCH 001.
1:36 p.m. This is the time set for Hearing Re: Defendants’ Motion to Vacate Entry of
Default Judgment and Dismiss Garnishment Proceedings. Counsel, Thomas Burke, is present on
behalf of Plaintiff. Counsel, Loren Ungar, is present on behalf of Defendants.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/07/2014
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2
Argument is presented.
Based upon the matters presented,
IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.
2:06 p.m. Matter concludes.
07/28/2014 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 07/28/2014 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
07/29/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/28/2014
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
U S BANK
2222 E CAMELBACK RD # 100
PHOENIX AZ 85016
KATHERINE BRUGGEMAN
PO BOX 27008
PHOENIX AZ 85061
LOREN R UNGAR
RULING
On July 8, 2014, following hearing and argument on Defendant Cimros, Inc.’s
(“Cimros”) Motion to Vacate Default Judgment and Dismiss Garnishment Proceedings (the
“Motion”), the court took this matter under advisement. The court has since received Cimros’
Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Support of Defendant’s Motion. As the latter motion’s
primary goal is to complete the record by attaching thereto a copy of the transcript of the June
12, 2014 proceeding,
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/28/2014
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED granting Cimros’ Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Support of
Defendant’s Motion.1
The court has now considered Cimros’ Motion, Plaintiff Camelback Village
Improvement Association, Inc.’s (“CVIA”) Response, Cimros’ Reply and Sur-Reply and the
attachments to the parties’ memoranda. Based upon the matters presented and for the reasons
hereinafter set forth,
IT IS ORDERED denying Cimros’ Motion to Vacate Default Judgment and Dismiss
Garnishment Proceeding.
Background
On August 1, 2005, CVIA enters into a property management agreement with MMS.
In June of 2008, a fire occurs causing damage to CVIA property.
On May 13, 2013, suit is filed, naming several defendants, including MMS.
On September 11, 2013, service is allegedly accomplished by personal service upon
MMS’ vice president and employee of over 30 years, Jane Knust, at MMS’ place of business
located at 5333 N. 7th Street, B114, in Phoenix (“MMS’ address”). MMS’ address is also the
corporate address for Cimros. In his affidavit of service, certified process server Donald A.
Foutz avers that Ms. Knust stated she was authorized to accept service. Ms. Knust does not deny
making that statement to Mr. Foust; however, she now qualifies it by denying that she ever stated
she had authority to accept service for Cimros, dba Mutual Management Services.
On October 16, 2013, CVIA files an application for default and sends a copy to MMS’
address.
On November 6, 2013, Ms. Bruggeman, the statutory agent for Cimros, sends an email to
CVIA’s counsel and references the claims “brought up against Mutual Management”.
On November 27, 2013, seven days after the filing of CVIA’s motion for entry of default
judgment and mailing of a copy to MMS’ address, Ms. Bruggeman sends a communication to
1 Cimros contends that the transcript corrects the record before the court with reference to Katherine
Bruggeman’s alleged statement that Cimros and its trade name, Mutual Management Services, Inc. (“MMS”) are
“one and the same”. Regardless of how one might interpret Ms. Bruggeman’s statements, whether Cimros and
MMS are “one in the same” is a question of law for the court to determine.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/28/2014
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 3
Cimros’ insurer and attaches a copy of the “default notice”. She makes additional statements
that are consistent with her having knowledge of the suit. And, she apologizes for any delay,
noting that she has been “facing some severe medical trials the past 60 plus days”.
MMS is not an entity. It is the duly registered trade name of Cimros. Cimros is an
Arizona corporation dba Mutual Management Services, Inc.
Issues Presented
Cimros seeks Ariz. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(4) relief. It claims that the judgment entered on
December 2, 2013 is void for lack of personal jurisdiction as (1) MMS is not an entity and the
real entity, Cimros was not named; and (2) Cimros was never properly served.
Discussion
A. Is the default judgment void for lack of personal jurisdiction because of CVIA’s
naming of a trade name (MMS) as the defendant rather than the corporation (Cimros) that it is
registered under?
The parties acknowledge that “[a] suit at law is not a children’s game, but a serious effort
on the part of adult human beings to administer justice…” United States v. A.H. Fischer Lumber
Co., 162 F.2d 872 (4th Cir. 1947). Then the games begin. CVIA accuses Cimros of “attempting
to undermine the legal process” by holding out MMS as a corporation and Ms. Knust as its vice
president. Cimros counters that CVIA is engaging in “trial by ambush”.2
Cimros points to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1 (i) and A.R.S. § 10-504(A); however, those citations
set forth procedures for service upon corporations and do not directly address the issue presented
herein.
CVIA counters that, despite an absence of any Arizona authority, there is a body of cases
from other jurisdictions compatible with Arizona’s notions of fair play and justice. See, Hughes
v. Cox, 601 So. 2d 465 (Ala. 1992) and other cases cited therein. Those foreign jurisdictions
conclude that while a corporation has the right to operate under a registered trade name, it should
also be liable under that name. In short, the corporation and the trade name are one and the
same.
2These barbs divert focus from the real issue at hand, namely, whether Cimros had notice and opportunity to
properly prepare and defend. See, Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Ramirez, 99 Ariz. 372, 380, 409 P.2d 292, 297 (1965). “
Service of process is for the purpose of notifying a defendant of the claim or charge against him so that he may
properly prepare himself to answer it. It is this notice that gives the court jurisdiction to proceed.”
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/28/2014
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 4
The court agrees. Such a result comports with Arizona authority that has long held that
the purpose of the Rules of Civil Procedure is to obviate delay and administer speedy justice.
Union Interchange, Inc. v. Benton, 100 Ariz. 33, 410 P.2d 477 (1966). Where, as here, the
corporation held itself out to the public in the name of its registered trade name, the corporation
that exalts a technicality over substance and fails to answer after service of the claim, does so at
its peril.
B. Even if Cimros could be sued in the name of its trade name, was the default judgment
void for lack of service?
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1(i) provides in pertinent part that service upon a domestic corporation
shall be made “…by delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to…an officer, a managing
or general agent, or to any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of
process.”
“Service of process can be impeached only by clear and convincing evidence.” Gen.
Elec. Capital Corp. v. Osterkamp, 172 Ariz. 191, 194, 836 P.2d 404, 407 (App.1992).
Cimros alleges that service is defective as it should have been upon its sole officer,
director and statutory agent, Ms. Bruggeman. That assertion only has merit if the court
concludes that CVIA knew that only Ms. Bruggeman was authorized to accept service. Based
upon the court’s review of the record presented and relied upon by the parties without further
testimony, this the court cannot do.
Cimros held out Ms. Knust to be a vice president. She was a 30 year employee of
Cimros. She was a signatory to the 2005 management agreement with CVIA. Every employee
reported to her. She was produced by MMS (Cimros) as its Rule 30(b)(6) representative in one
of the underlying suits. She acknowledged to Mr. Faust that she was authorized to accept service
on behalf of MMS. That she may have not qualified that acknowledgement as she does now
(never telling Mr. Faust that she had no authority to accept for Cimros), is a distinction without
any difference. Cimros and MMS are one and the same.
Both parties cite Koven v. Saberdyne Sys., Inc. 128 Ariz. 318, 625 P.2d 907 (App. 1980).
The court of appeals addressed the meaning of the term “agent” in Rule 4.1(i), stating that “the
phrase agent authorized by law to receive service of process is sufficiently broad enough to
permit service through an ostensible agent.” 128 Ariz. at 322.
THE COURT FINDS that by holding Ms. Knust out as MMS’ vice president, authorizing
her to supervise the activities of all employees while conducting the business of Cimros at
Cimros’ corporate office and signing the CVIA agreement as a vice president, Cimros knowingly
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
07/28/2014
Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 5
or negligently held Ms. Knust out as possessing, or allowing CVIA and others to assume that she
possessed authority to accept service.
THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that even if CVIA knew or had reason to know that
Ms. Bruggeman was the person authorized to “handle” the dispute, there was no limitation
conveyed that only she had authority to accept service of the summons and complaint. CVIA
acted reasonably in assuming that Ms. Knust had ostensible authority to accept service of the
summons and complaint.
THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that service of the summons and complaint upon Ms.
Knust satisfied the purpose of service…providing notice and opportunity to defend. The court
rejects Cimros’ protestations that it did not learn of this lawsuit until the subject garnishment
proceeding. Ms. Bruggeman’s actions in the period after the mailing of the Application for
Default (see background section herein), reflect the actions of one who was dilatory and
neglectful in responding to a complaint and is now reacting to that circumstance. Based upon the
matters presented,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CVIA shall lodge a form of judgment against
garnishee U.S.Bank by August 4, 2014.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED signing this minute entry as a formal written Order of this
Court.
/ s / HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
10/17/2013 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 10/17/2013 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/18/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
10/17/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
S. Wrye/R. Tomlinson
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
SPENCER T PROFFITT
MUTUAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
INC
5333 N 7TH ST
STE 1700
PHOENIX AZ 85012
COMM. VATZ
MINUTE ENTRY
This division has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Motion for Default Judgment
against Defendant Mutual Management Services, Inc. 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 Vatz.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
10/17/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a
default judgment must be e-filed.
Pursuant to Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117, default judgment
packets are not permitted to be e-filed. Accordingly, parties are directed to hand-deliver a
default coversheet and copies of the necessary filed documents to the commissioner’s division
for the entry of a default judgment.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, no further action will be taken by the assigned
commissioner until the necessary filed documents and coversheet are delivered to the division.
The parties/counsel can find the default judgment coversheet on the Court’s website at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/forms.asp
The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked
questions at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.
10/30/2013 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 10/30/2013 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/31/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
10/30/2013
Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
SPENCER T PROFFITT
INACTIVE CALENDAR
The Court having received Notice of Settlement filed October 29, 2013,
IT IS ORDERED accepting the Notice of Settlement and placing this matter on the
Inactive Calendar for dismissal on or after December 16, 2013, without further notice unless a
Judgment is entered or filed or a Stipulation for Dismissal is presented.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.
11/01/2013 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 11/01/2013 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/04/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
11/01/2013
Docket Code 021
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
R. Tomlinson
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
SPENCER T PROFFITT
MINUTE ENTRY
Pursuant
to
Plaintiff’s
Notice
of
Clarification
Re:
Notice
of
Settlement
(Filed October 29, 2013), filed October 30, 2013,
IT IS ORDERED nunc pro tunc placing this matter on the Inactive Calendar as to
Community Association Underwriters of America, Inc. and QBE Insurance Corporation
only, for dismissal on December 16, 2013, without further notice unless a Judgment is entered
or filed or a Stipulation for Dismissal is presented.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.
12/02/2013 — CV2013007018 IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC, CAMELBACK VILLAGE 12/02/2013 HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/03/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007018
12/02/2013
Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BENJAMIN E. VATZ
S. Hack
Deputy
CAMELBACK VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION INC
THOMAS P BURKE II
v.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA INC, et al.
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Default Judgment, as signed by the
Court on November 25, 2013 and filed by the clerk on December 2, 2013
Pursuant to State Rule 5(j)(2), the Clerk’s office is required to notify all parties when an
order is signed by the Court, either by mailing a conformed copy, or by minute entry. No copies
or envelopes having been submitted, notice is hereby given via minute entry.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.
