Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2013-007263: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association Inc.

Case Number

CV2013-007263

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

5/13/2013

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Blanchard, John

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/12/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/08/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

RULING

Before the court and fully briefed is Defendants’ December 29, 2014 Objection to
Plaintiffs’ Notices of Deposition for Joyce Strole, Ron Holenwinski, and Grace Violette, which
the court construes as a motion for protective order. Oral argument is not needed.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion. The parties shall schedule the noticed
depositions at a mutually agreeable time and place.

The court is not otherwise modifying the scheduling order.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/12/2021 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/08/2021

Docket Code LED
Form EXHCVREL
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
EXHIBITS UNIT
C. Concholar (EXB)

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY
J P MORGAN CHASE BANK N A
PO BOX 183164
COLUMBUS OH 43218

NOTICE REGARDING DISPOSITION OF EXHIBITS

The Clerk of the Superior Court is in possession of exhibits in the above captioned case.
This case has been reviewed pursuant to Rules of Court Criminal Procedure, Rule 28.1; Superior
Court - Local Rules of Maricopa County, Rule 2.8(d); Rules of Civil Appellate Procedures, Rule
11(a)(6); and is not subject to further modification.

To claim your exhibits, please call 602-372-2284 to make an appointment. Appointments
are available Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. If the
exhibits need to be retained, a request must be made in writing within ten (10) days of the
mailing of this notice.

The subject exhibits will not be eligible for release until January 13, 2021 and must be
collected by February 19, 2021 or the exhibits shall be disposed. The following party(ies) have
exhibits that need to be collected: Plaintiff and Defendant. Exhibits may only be released to the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/08/2021

Docket Code LED
Form EXHCVREL
Page 2

party which presented the exhibits. For further verification please contact the Exhibits Unit at
602-372-2284.

This notice serves as the only written notification regarding disposition of these exhibits.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/20/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/15/2016

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:00 a.m. This is the time set for a trial management conference. Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus
is present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James Robert Eckley),
who also represents Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus. Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners
Association, Inc.; Grace Violette; Bernard Potof; Liz Potof; Joyce Strole; Ron Strole; Ronald
Holewinski; and Rosie Holewinski are represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Defendants’ December 28, 2015 Motion to Bifurcate/Sever Plaintiffs’ Count for
Injunctive Relief and the claims being asserted in this case are discussed.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Bifurcate/Sever.

The court will resolve all equitable claims after trial based on the evidence heard during
the jury trial. Whether additional evidence is necessary after the jury is discharged will be
discussed at a later time.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/15/2016

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 2

The court addresses counsel regarding the forms of verdict in this case.

This matter is set for 8 trial days beginning on February 22, 2016.

Trial hours and days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (with a lunch recess from noon
to 1:30 p.m. and two 15-minute recesses, daily), Monday through Thursday.

The court will allocate trial time in this matter. Each side will be allotted 14 hours. This
time includes the counsel’s individual voir dire, opening statements, closing arguments, and any
time spent examining witnesses.

The parties are to have witnesses prepared and ready to testify at all times during the trial
so that the jury’s time is used efficiently.

The electronic equipment available in the courtroom is reviewed.

The Rule of Exclusion of Witnesses is invoked by both sides.

Defendants request the presence of a court reporter for the trial.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding
in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

The jury will consist of 8 jurors and 2 alternates for a total of 10 jurors. The alternates
will be selected by lot at the appropriate time unless the parties reach an agreement to allow them
to deliberate. An agreement of 6 of the remaining 8 jurors will be necessary to return a verdict.

The voir dire process is briefly reviewed.

Counsel are advised that objections to exhibits will be resolved during the course of trial.
Additionally, admission of exhibits, whether through stipulation or for lack of preserving an
objection in the Joint Pretrial Statement, will also be addressed during the trial.

The deadline for delivery of trial exhibits to the courtroom clerk is affirmed: February 1,
2016. This is a firm deadline.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/15/2016

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 3

The use of juror notebooks is addressed.

With regard to deposition designation objections, the court will resolve them at trial as
follows. By 4:30 p.m. the day before a party plans to read deposition testimony, that party shall
provide the court with a hard copy of the deposition transcript with the designated portions
highlighted in one color, cross-designations highlighted in another color, and the objections written
in the margins. The court will rule on any objections by the next day.

The court will provide counsel a draft set of preliminary jury instructions the first morning
of trial. Any objections will be resolved prior to presentation to the jury. The final jury instructions
will be resolved during the course of trial.

Counsel may file any trial memoranda they deem appropriate in support of Rule 50 motions,
complex jury issues or other legal issues.

The court will draft a summary of the case for jury selection based on the parties’ separate
proposals.

With regard to Defendants’ pending motions in limine, the court rules as follows.

All denials are without prejudice to trial objections.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number One to Exclude Evidence of the Propriety of
the Recall Voting Wherein Suzanne Sallus was Removed from Board of Directors of
SDVPOA is GRANTED based on relevance and Rule 403.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Two to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Parties’ Injunctions & Jeff Sallus’ Subsequent Arrest is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Four to Exclude Evidence of No Reserve
Fund is GRANTED based on relevance and Rule 403.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Five to Exclude Allegations/Evidence of Use
of Unlicensed Contractors & Failure to Grade Roads Between May 2011 Through
April 2012 is GRANTED based on relevance and Rule 403.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Six to Exclude Alleged Statement of Grace
Violette to Prior Attorney for Plaintiffs in Different Case is GRANTED based on
hearsay.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/15/2016

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 4

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Seven to Exclude Evidence of Grace
Violette’s Alleged Violation of CC&R #10 Requiring 2000 Square Feet of Living
Area is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Eight to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Defendants’ Alleged Failure to Disclose Financial Condition to Plaintiffs Prior to
April 2, 2011, and Defendants’ Other Lawsuits is GRANTED based on relevance
and Rule 403.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Nine to Exclude Evidence/Argument that Board is
Obligated to Enforce CC&Rs is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Ten to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Statements Allegedly Made by Defendants to Plaintiffs’ Unidentified Neighbors is
DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Eleven to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Plaintiffs’ Allegation that Ron Holewinski Wrongfully Removed Disclaimer on Road
Permit is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Twelve to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Mailing Mugshot by Unknown Individual to Plaintiff’s Employer is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Thirteen to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Plaintiffs’ Allegations Re: Reports to Building Department is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Fourteen to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Defendants’ Alleged Misuse of Association E-Mail is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Fifteen to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Defendants’ Alleged Unfounded Reports to Animal Control & Maricopa County
Planning & Development is DENIED.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Sixteen to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re:
Defendants’ Alleged Misuse of Cameras is DENIED.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/15/2016

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 5

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Seventeen to Exclude Evidence/Argument
Re: Defendants’ Alleged Mismanagement of Road Maintenance is GRANTED based
on relevance and Rule 403.

 Defendants’ Motion in Limine Eighteen to Exclude Evidence/Argument Re: Health
Issues of Jeffrey Sallus is DENIED.

Discussion is held regarding Defendants’ Motion in Limine Number Three to Exclude
Evidence of the Potential Resale and Diminished Value of Plaintiffs’ Home.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion in part. The court will allow Plaintiffs to testify
that they believe any number of circumstances affects the value of their home; however, the
court will not allow Plaintiffs to testify as to a specific dollar amount.

Plaintiffs’ Motions in Limine are discussed. The court rules as follows.

 DENYING Motion in Limine No. 1 as to Defendants’ 5th Supplemental Disclosure
Statement for the reasons stated in the response. Further, the court finds that the
timing of the disclosure is harmless and that some of the items could not have been
disclosed earlier.

 DENYING Motion in Limine No. 2 as to Defendants’ 6th Supplemental Disclosure
Statement. Counsel are advised to have disclosure statements readily available during
the trial to resolve disclosure objections.

 DENYING Motion in Limine No. 3 as to Defendants’ 7th Supplemental Disclosure
Statement on the basis that the late disclosure is harmless.

The court briefly addresses counsel regarding settlement negotiations.

9:50 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/29/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/27/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

Oral argument having been requested,

IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on (1) Defendants’ December 3, 2014 Motion to
Strike Plaintiff’s [sic] Untimely and Prejudicial Expert Disclosure; (2) Plaintiffs’ December 19,
2014 Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Type Expert Testimony and (3) Defendants’
December 23, 2014 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint for February 27, 2015 at
11:00 a.m. in this division. Counsel and the parties, if representing themselves, are to appear in
person before:

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/27/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Oral argument shall be limited to one (1) hour with the time divided equally between the
sides.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Warner’s online profile of the Superior
Court’s website for additional information on appearing before Judge Warner.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/03/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/30/2015

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:02 a.m. This is the time set for status/scheduling conference. Plaintiffs are represented
(telephonically) by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of J. Robert Eckley). Defendants are
represented (telephonically) by Counsel Jill L. Ormond (appearing in place of Larry D. Langley).
Defendant Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Associations, Inc. is also represented
(telephonically) by Counsel Guy W. Bluff.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

The court has reviewed the parties’ January 26, 2015 Joint Status Report.

The court addresses counsel regarding the motions set for oral argument on February 27,
2015. Plaintiffs’ counsel advises the court that he has a conflict on that date and requests that the
oral argument be reset.

IT IS ORDERED vacating the February 27, 2015 oral argument regarding (1)
Defendants’ December 3, 2014 Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s [sic] Untimely and Prejudicial Expert

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/30/2015

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2

Disclosure; (2) Plaintiffs’ December 19, 2014 Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Type Expert
Testimony and (3) Defendants’ December 23, 2014 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended
Complaint and resetting same for February 11, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in this division.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiffs’ January 28, 2015 Motion to Defer Response to
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Rule 56(f).

IT IS ORDERED granting the Rule 56(f) request and extending the deadline for
Plaintiffs to respond to Defendants’ January 16, 2015 Motion for Summary Judgment to April 1,
2015. It is the court’s expectation that the depositions will be completed by that date. If the
depositions are not completed, counsel should confer in an attempt to extend the response
deadline and so advise the court. If counsel cannot reach an agreement, counsel should contact
the court.

If, in review after the depositions, Defendants believe they should have a chance to refile
or supplement the summary judgment motion, the court will allow Defendants to do so.
Accordingly, counsel should confer in an attempt to set a deadline for that, if necessary.

Based on the current status of the case, the court will not set a trial date today.

IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic scheduling conference on April 21, 2015 at
9:00 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division for the purpose of setting trial, if the case is
ready to set trial. Plaintiffs’ counsel shall initiate the conference call to this division at 602-372-
2966. All persons appearing shall appear on land lines and not on cellular phones, and shall not
use the speakerphone features of their telephones, in order to maximize all participants’ ability to
hear and be heard. Counsel shall have their calendars available for this proceeding.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, no less than five days before the conference set
above, the parties shall file a joint status report containing (1) a very brief description of the case;
(2) a statement of the status of discovery and other pertinent matters; (3) a list of pending
motions or other matters, whether at issue or not; (4) the status of alternative dispute resolution;
(5) when the parties anticipate the case will be ready for trial; and (6) how many trial days the
parties estimate will be needed.

9:14 a.m. Matter concludes.

Later:

By agreement of the parties, due to scheduling conflicts,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

01/30/2015

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3

IT IS ORDERED vacating the February 11, 2015 oral argument regarding (1)
Defendants’ December 3, 2014 Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s [sic] Untimely and Prejudicial Expert
Disclosure; (2) Plaintiffs’ December 19, 2014 Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Type Expert
Testimony and (3) Defendants’ December 23, 2014 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended
Complaint and resetting same for February 24, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. in this division. Counsel and
the parties, if representing themselves, are to appear in person before:

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

Oral argument shall be limited to one (1) hour with the time divided equally between the
sides.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/24/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/22/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 1

Courtroom: ECB-512

Prior to the commencement of trial, Plaintiffs’ exhibits 1-124 and Defendants’ exhibits
125-181 are marked for identification.

9:24 a.m. This is the time set for a trial to a jury. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and Suzanne
Sallus are present and are represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M. Langley,
who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association, Inc., Liz
Potof and Ron Strole. The prospective jurors are not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Logistical issues are briefly discussed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/22/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Let the record reflect that at the request of counsel, court and counsel will conduct an
informal discussion in chambers, off of the record.

9:26 a.m. Court stands at recess.

9:46 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The
prospective jurors are present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Voir dire examination commences.

10:49 a.m. The prospective jurors are excused with the exception of Juror 3.

Juror 3 is questioned further.

10:50 a.m. Juror 3 is excused from the courtroom; court remains in session.

10:50 a.m. Juror 8 is now present, outside the presence of the remaining jurors.

Juror 8 is questioned further.

10:51 a.m. Juror 8 is excused from the courtroom; court remains in session.

The court will excuse Jurors 3 and 8 based on their hardship excuses.

Scheduling is discussed.

10:52 a.m. Court stands at recess.

11:11 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Voir dire examination continues.

12:03 p.m. The prospective jurors are excused; court remains in session.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/22/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Additional juror hardships are discussed.

Defendants move to strike Juror 20 for cause.

IT IS ORDERED granting the motion and striking Juror 20 for cause.

Defendants move to strike Juror 14 for cause.

IT IS ORDERED denying the motion to strike Juror 14 for cause.

12:10 p.m. Court stands at recess.

1:35 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The
prospective jurors are not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The Preliminary Jury Instructions are approved.

The trial jurors selected are confirmed with counsel.

1:36 p.m. Court stands at recess.

1:48 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The
prospective jurors are present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Ten persons are seated and sworn to act as trial jurors in this case.

1:52 p.m. The remaining jurors are excused from the courtroom.

The Preliminary Jury Instructions are read.

FILED: Preliminary Jury Instructions

Opening statements.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/22/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 4

3:02 p.m. Court stands at recess.

Defendants’ exhibits 182-192 are marked for identification.

3:24 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Opening statements continue.

Plaintiffs’ case:

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 44 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 45 is received in evidence.

4:32 p.m. The Jury is excused for the evening; court remains in session.

Scheduling is discussed.

4:33 p.m. Court stands at recess until 10:00 a.m. on February 23, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/25/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/23/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 2

Courtroom: ECB-512

FILED:
1. Deposition of Jeffrey Sallus, dated September 11, 2014

2. Deposition of Jeffrey Sallus, Vol. II, dated November 19, 2014

3. Deposition of Suzanne Sallus, dated September 11, 2014

4. Deposition of Suzanne Sallus, Vol. II, dated November 19, 2014

5. Deposition of Jared Mitchell Sallus, dated September 11, 2014

Defendants’ exhibit 193 is marked for identification.

10:02 a.m. Jury trial continues from February 22, 2016. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are present and represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M.
Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Inc., Liz Potof and Ron Strole. The Jury is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/23/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Plaintiffs’ case continues:

Suzanne Sallus resumes the stand and testifies further.

Defendants’ exhibit 126 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 10 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 3 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 9 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 20 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 13 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 16 is received in evidence.

10:58 a.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

Logistical issues are discussed.

10:58 a.m. Court stands at recess.

11:17 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The court has received a question from the Jury. The question is read into the record.

FILED: Jury Question (No. 1)

Suzanne Sallus continues testifying.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 17 is received in evidence.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/23/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Defendants’ exhibit 164 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 14 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 19 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 98 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibits 95 and 121 are received in evidence.

12:02 p.m. Court stands at recess.

1:36 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Let the record reflect Suzanne Sallus’s testimony is being interrupted at this time to
accommodate another witness.

Defendants’ exhibit 147 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Jarred Sallus is sworn and testifies.

Defendants’ exhibit 169 is received in evidence.

Defendants move to strike the witness’s testimony based on a violation of the Rule of
Exclusion of Witnesses.

IT IS ORDERED denying the request to strike.

Suzanne Sallus resumes the stand and testifies further.

Defendants’ exhibit 179 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 53 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 55 is received in evidence.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/23/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 4

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 54 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 56 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 2 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 132 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 38 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 39 is received in evidence subject to redaction.

2:52 p.m. Court stands at recess.

3:11 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Suzanne Sallus continues testifying.

Defendants’ exhibit 158 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 162 is received in evidence.

4:26 p.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

Scheduling is discussed.

4:28 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on February 24, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/26/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

HEARING

Courtroom: ECB-512

8:33 a.m. This is the time set for oral argument regarding (1) Defendants’ December 3,
2014 Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s [sic] Untimely and Prejudicial Expert Disclosure; (2) Plaintiffs’
December 19, 2014 Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Type Expert Testimony and (3)
Defendants’ December 23, 2014 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs
are represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of J. Robert Eckley). Defendants are
all represented by Counsel Jill L. Ormond (appearing in place of Larry D. Langley). Plaintiff
Suzanne Sallus is also present.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Oral argument is presented.

IT IS ORDERED taking these issues under advisement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming the April 21, 2015 scheduling conference set
for 9:00 a.m. in this division. Time allotted: (30 minutes).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the conference will now be conducted in person and
all parties will be present at the conference.

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

Defendants’ counsel requests the court’s assistance in obtaining a secure location for the
remaining depositions in this matter. Counsel further indicates that the remaining depositions
have all been scheduled for the same day.

Counsel is directed to submit this request in writing.

9:10 a.m. Matter concludes.

Later

The court rules as follows.

1.
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint.

Defendants seek dismissal of claims asserted by Mr. and Mrs. Sallus for various reasons.
Because the Salluses were the original named Plaintiffs, the operative filing date for statute of
limitations purposes is May 13, 2013, when the original complaint was filed. The fact that they
listed themselves as trustees and not as individuals does not make a difference in light of the
substantive allegations in the complaint.

Based on Plaintiffs’ allegations, a jury could find that claims accrued after May 13, 2012.
Dismissal is not warranted on statute of limitations grounds.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3

Dismissal also is not warranted for lack of indispensable parties. When one sues an
entity for breach of contract, its directors do not need to be joined as defendants.

Finally, the amended complaint adequately alleges a basis for punitive damages.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

2.
Defendants’ Motion to Strike Expert Disclosure.

The court construes this Motion as one to preclude testimony. The court finds that
Plaintiffs’ rebuttal expert opinions were not timely disclosed, that there was not good cause for
late disclosure and that the untimeliness was not harmless. Plaintiffs had ample time under the
amended scheduling order.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion and precluding Plaintiffs from offering Mr.
Schippel or Mr. Bainbridge as witnesses.

3.
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Type Expert Testimony.

The court cannot find at this stage that Defendants’ standard of care expert will offer no
admissible testimony. The admissibility of particular opinions can be determined at trial.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/26/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 3

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:36 a.m. Jury trial continues from February 23, 2016. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are present and represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M.
Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Inc., Liz Potof and Ron Strole. The Jury is present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Plaintiffs’ case continues:

Let the record reflect Suzanne Sallus’s testimony is being interrupted at this time to
accommodate another witness.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Grace Violette is sworn and testifies.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 28 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 18 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 138 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

Defendants’ exhibit 160 is received in evidence, at the request of Plaintiffs.

10:41 a.m. Court stands at recess.

Let the record reflect that a redacted copy of Plaintiffs’ exhibit 39 is substituted for the
unredacted copy originally marked as exhibit 39.

IT IS ORDERED releasing to Plaintiffs’ counsel the unredacted copy of exhibit 39.

ISSUED: Exhibit Release Form

11:02 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Grace Violette continues testifying.

12:01 p.m. Court stands at recess.

1:39 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Let the record reflect Grace Violette’s testimony is being interrupted at this time to
accommodate another witness.

Let the record further reflect that Wayne J. Peck, attorney for the next witness, Paul
McNeil, is present in the courtroom.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/24/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Paul McNeil is sworn and testifies.

The witness is excused. The witness is further excused from the subpoena issued for his
appearance on February 27, 2016.

Mr. McNeil and Mr. Peck exit the courtroom.

Suzanne Sallus resumes the stand and testifies further.

Defendants’ exhibit 167 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 178 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 12 is received in evidence.

Jeffrey Drew Sallus is sworn and testifies.

3:00 p.m. Court stands at recess.

3:23 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present (with the
exception of Defendants Bernard Potof and Joyce Strole). The Jury is present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Jeffrey Drew Sallus continues testifying.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 124 is received in evidence.

4:29 p.m. The Jury is excused for the evening; court remains in session.

Scheduling is discussed.

4:30 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on February 25, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/29/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/25/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 4

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:58 a.m. Jury trial continues from February 24, 2016. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are present and represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M.
Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Inc., Liz Potof and Ron Strole. The Jury is present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Plaintiffs’ case continues:

Let the record reflect Jeffrey Drew Sallus’s testimony is being interrupted at this time to
resume examination of another witness.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/25/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Grace Violette resumes the stand and testifies further.

10:52 a.m. Court stands at recess.

11:09 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Grace Violette continues testifying.

11:58 a.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

The forms of verdict are discussed.

Scheduling is discussed.

12:02 p.m. Court stands at recess.

1:35 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Jeffrey Drew Sallus resumes the stand and testifies further.

Joyce Strole is sworn and testifies.

3:01 p.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

The court addresses counsel briefly regarding the pace of the trial.

3:02 p.m. Court stands at recess.

3:21 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present (with the
exception of Mr. Sallus). The Jury is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/25/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Joyce Strole continues testifying.

3:28 p.m. Let the record reflect Mr. Sallus is now present.

Bernard Potof is sworn and testifies.

Rosie Holewinski is sworn and testifies.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 123 is received in evidence.

4:27 p.m. The Jury is excused for the weekend recess; court remains in session.

Scheduling is discussed.

The verdict forms are discussed.

The presentation of Defendants’ Rule 50 motion is briefly addressed.

4:33 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on February 29, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/02/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/29/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 5

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:30 a.m. Jury trial continues from February 25, 2016. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are present and represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M.
Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Inc., Liz Potof and Ron Strole. The Jury is not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Defendants’ counsel advises the court that a defense witness will be called out of order
this morning. Counsel further indicates that the witness, Joni Cage, and her counsel, Frances Oh
Shinn-Eckberg, are present in the courtroom.

9:33 a.m. The Jury is now present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/29/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Let the record reflect Rosie Holewinski’s testimony is being interrupted at this time to
allow Defendants to call a witness out of order.

Joni Cage is sworn and testifies.

The witness is excused.

Plaintiffs’ case resumes:

Rosie Holewinski resumes the stand and testifies further.

10:34 a.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

Scheduling is discussed.

10:36 a.m. Court stands at recess.

10:56 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Ronald Holewinski is sworn and testifies.

The court receives a question from the Jury. Court and counsel review the same outside
the hearing of the Jury.

The witness is questioned further.

FILED: Jury Question (No. 2)

Plaintiffs rest.

Let the record reflect that Defendants move for judgment as a matter of law outside the
hearing of the Jury. The motion will be deferred to a later time.

Defendants’ case:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/29/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Suzanne Sallus is recalled and testifies further.

Jeffrey Sallus is recalled and testifies further.

Defendants rest.

The court addresses the Jury regarding scheduling.

11:53 a.m. The Jury is excused; court remains in session.

Defendants’ exhibit 139 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 7 is received in evidence, at the request of Defendants.

Defendants’ exhibit 131 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 137 is received in evidence.

Defendants’ exhibit 168 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 37 is received in evidence, at the request of Defendants.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 4 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 1 is received in evidence.

Plaintiffs’ exhibit 102 is received in evidence.

11:56 a.m. Court stands at recess.

1:33 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Rebuttal:

Suzanne Sallus is recalled to the stand and testifies further.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/29/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 4

Plaintiffs rest.

1:57 p.m. The Jury is excused for the day; court remains in session.

The court has reviewed Defendants’ February 29, 2016 Motion for Judgment as Matter of
Law (Rule 50).

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument A of the Motion with respect to Plaintiffs’ claims
for defamation and defamation per se based on May 7, 2012 Chase letter are time barred by the
one-year statute of limitations.

Discussion and argument are presented on the other parts of the Motion.

IT IS ORDERED granting Argument B of the Motion with respect to Plaintiff Jeffrey
Sallus may not base a claim for defamation or false light on the Chase May 7th letter.

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument C of the Motion with respect to the mugshot does
not support a claim of defamation since there is nothing false about it.

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument D of the Motion with respect to Plaintiff Jeffrey
Sallus did not plead or assert a cause of action for false light.

IT IS ORDERED granting Argument E of the Motion with respect to Plaintiff Suzanne
Sallus may not base a claim for defamation or false light on the mugshot.

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument F of the Motion with respect to the mugshot was
not publicized to the public. Consequently, insufficient evidence was produced to establish a
prima facie case of false light based on the mugshot.

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument G of the Motion with respect to Plaintiffs have not
submitted sufficient evidence of selective enforcement and Argument H of the Motion with
respect to Plaintiffs have not submitted any evidence of damages to establish a prima facie case
of breach of contract (selective enforcement claim).

IT IS ORDERED denying Argument I of the Motion with respect to Plaintiffs have not
submitted sufficient clear and convincing evidence of the elements for punitive damages to
establish a prima facie case justifying the submission of the claim for punitive damages to the
jury.

Defendants’ request for a limiting instruction is discussed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

02/29/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 5

The court will give a limiting instruction but may modify what has been proposed by
Defendants.

At the request of Defendants’ counsel, the court will take a recess at this time to meet
with counsel informally in chambers.

2:16 p.m. Court stands at recess.

2:41 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the Plaintiffs present. The Jury
is not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Jury instructions are discussed and settled.

Verdict forms are approved.

2:50 p.m. Court stands at recess.

3:05 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel present. The Jury is not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The jury instructions are approved.

Two alternates will be selected by lot at the appropriate time.

3:07 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on March 1, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/03/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 6

Courtroom: ECB-512

9:34 a.m. Jury trial continues from February 29, 2016. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of James
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are present and represented by Counsel Larry D. Langley and Kathleen M.
Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Inc., Liz Potof and Ron Strole. The Jury is not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The court advises the Jury of the law applicable to this case.

Closing arguments are presented.

11:03 a.m. Court stands at recess.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

11:21 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Closing arguments continue.

11:58 a.m. Court stands at recess.

1:33 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present. The Jury is
present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

Closing arguments continue.

The court reads the closing instruction.

FILED: Final Jury Instructions

Jurors 5 and 7 are selected by lot as the alternate jurors and excused from further
consideration of this case; subject to recall.

2:37 p.m. The Jury retires in charge of the sworn bailiffs to consider its verdicts.

The court addresses counsel regarding logistical issues.

IT IS ORDERED setting the following briefing schedule on non-jury trial issues.

 Plaintiffs’ opening brief shall be filed by March 18, 2016.
 Defendants’ responsive brief shall be filed by April 1, 2016.
 Plaintiffs’ reply brief shall be filed by April 8, 2016.

After reviewing the briefs, the court will determine whether oral argument is necessary.

The court has received a question from the Jury. The question is read into the record and
discussed. Based thereon, a written answer will be provided via the bailiff.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

2:42 p.m. Court stands at recess.

FILED: Jury Question

3:04 p.m. Court reconvenes with Defendants’ counsel present. The Jury is not present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The court’s staff has been unable to contact Plaintiffs’ counsel; therefore, the court will
proceed in his absence.

The court has received a question from the Jury. The question and the court’s proposed
answer are read into the record and briefly discussed. Based thereon, the written answer will be
provided via the bailiff.

3:05 p.m. Court stands at recess.

4:19 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the parties present.

Court Reporter Luz Franco is present. A record of the proceedings is also made by audio
and/or videotape.

The Jury is all present in the jury box and by its Foreperson returns into court its verdicts,
which are read and recorded by the clerk, and are as follows:

Verdict 1(a)

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Grace Violette for defamation
and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our
oaths, do find Defendant Violette:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(b)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 4

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Bernard Potof for defamation
and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our
oaths, do find Defendant Potof:

X Not Liable.”
The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(c)

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Joyce Strole for defamation and
false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find Defendant Strole:

X Not Liable.”
The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(d)

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Ronald Holewinski for
defamation and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action,
upon our oaths, do find Defendant Holewinski:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(e)

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Rosie Holewinski for
defamation and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action,
upon our oaths, do find Defendant Holewinski:

X Not Liable.”
The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(f)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 5

“On Plaintiff Suzanne Sallus’s claims against Defendant Sunrise Desert Vistas Property
Owners Association for defamation and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in
the above-entitled action, upon our oaths, do find the Defendant Association:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 4

“On the Plaintiff Trust’s claim against the Defendant Association for breach of contract,
we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths, do find:

X For the Association.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(ff)

“On Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Sunrise Desert Vistas Property
Owners Association for defamation and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in
the above-entitled action, upon our oaths, do find the Defendant Association:

X Not Liable.”

This verdict form has been signed by the following jurors: Juror 4, Juror 6, Juror 2, Juror
1, Juror 10, and Juror 8.

Verdict 1(ee)

“On Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Rosie Holewinski for defamation
and false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our
oaths, do find Defendant Holewinski:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(dd)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 6

“On Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Ronald Holewinski for defamation and
false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find Defendant Holewinski:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(cc)

“On Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Joyce Strole for defamation and
false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find Defendant Strole:

X Not Liable.”

This verdict form has been signed by the following jurors: Juror 4, Juror 6, Juror 2, Juror
1, Juror 10, and Juror 8.

Verdict 1(bb)

“On Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Bernard Potof for defamation and
false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find Defendant Potof:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

Verdict 1(aa)

“On Plaintiff Jeffrey Sallus’s claims against Defendant Grace Violette for defamation and
false light, we, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find Defendant Violette:

X Not Liable.”

The verdict is unanimous and signed by the Foreperson, Juror 8.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/01/2016

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 7

The jurors reply that these are their true verdicts.

FILED: Verdicts (21)

The Jury is thanked by the court, released from the admonition and excused from further
consideration of this case.

4:27 p.m. The Jury is excused from the courtroom; court remains in session.

The court addresses the parties regarding logistical issues.

Pursuant to the verdict entered, and there being no further need to retain the exhibits not
offered in evidence in the custody of the Clerk of the Court,

IT IS ORDERED that the clerk permanently release all exhibits not offered in evidence
to the counsel/party causing them to be marked, or to their written designee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel/party or written designee take immediate
possession of all exhibits referenced above.

ISSUED: Exhibit Release Forms

FILED: Exhibit Worksheet, Trial/Hearing Worksheet, Jury Note, and Jury List

4:29 p.m. Trial concludes.

Later:

IT IS ORDERED that the jury fees be assessed against Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and
Suzanne Sallus, in the amount of $1,696.20, all in accordance with the formal written Judgment
for Jury Fees signed by the court on March 1, 2016 and filed (entered) by the clerk on March 1,
2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/04/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/02/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC

ORDER OF THE COURT

At the request of Defendants’ counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall conduct the depositions scheduled for Tuesday,
March 24, 2015 at the following location:

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)
DOWNTOWN JUSTICE CENTER
620 W. JACKSON ST., SUITE 2049 (2ND FLOOR)
PHOENIX AZ 85003

The parties will meet in the ADR lobby at 9:00 a.m. and will be escorted by ADR to the
conference room located in ADR’s secure area. ADR’s phone number is 602-506-7884.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the conference room will be available to the parties
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., with the exception of the lunch hour, from noon to 1:00 p.m.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/02/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

Let the record reflect that counsel have indicated a total of nine people will
attend/participate in the depositions.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/21/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/19/2014

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

CONFERENCE RESET

The court having signed an Amended Scheduling Order in this matter on March 19, 2014,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the status conference set for October 31, 2014 and resetting
this matter for a telephonic status conference on January 30, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. (time allotted:
15 minutes) in this division for the purpose of determining whether the case is ready for trial
and, if appropriate, to set trial. Plaintiffs’ counsel shall initiate the conference call to this
division at 602-372-2966. All persons appearing shall appear on land lines and not on cellular
phones, and shall not use the speakerphone features of their telephones, in order to maximize all
participants’ ability to hear and be heard. Counsel shall have their calendars available for this
proceeding.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in no less than five (5) days prior to the status
conference set herein, the parties shall submit a joint status report to the court that includes (1) a
very brief description of the case; (2) the status of discovery and other pertinent matters; (3) a list
of pending motions or other matters, whether at issue or not; (4) the status of alternative dispute
resolution; (5) when the parties anticipate the case will be ready for trial; and (6) how many trial
days the parties estimate will be needed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

03/19/2014

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

Effective April 15, 2014, new civil rules and forms are in effect for managing cases
moving to trial. Be sure to review the new Civil Rules 16, 26, 37, 38, 72 through 74 and 77.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/23/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/21/2015

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

JURY TRIAL SET

Courtroom: ECB - 512

8:58 a.m. This is the time set for a status/scheduling conference. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus
and Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris (appearing in place of J.
Robert Eckley). Defendants Grace Violette, Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald Holewinski,
and Rosie Holewinski are represented by Counsel Jill L. Ormond, Kathleen M. Langley and
Larry D. Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners
Association, Liz Potof and Ron Strole. Also present is a representative of Sunrise Desert Vistas
Property, Monica Dorsey.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

The court has reviewed the parties’ April 16, 2015 Joint Status Report.

Discussion is held regarding the setting of a trial date.

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for an 8-day jury trial beginning on February 22,
2016 at 9:30 a.m. (concluding by 4:30 p.m. on March 3, 2016) in this division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/21/2015

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

Trial hours and days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (with a lunch recess from noon
to 1:30 p.m. and two 15-minute recesses, daily), Monday through Thursday.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a final trial management conference for January
15, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. (time allotted: one hour) in this division. All counsel (and any self-
represented party) shall appear in person unless otherwise ordered.

9:06 a.m. Counsel Guy W. Bluff is now present (as co-counsel) on behalf of Defendant
Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association, Inc.

The court addresses the parties regarding the lack of resolution a trial will provide to all
parties in this action and encourages the parties to consider participating in another mediation in
an effort to find a resolution all parties can agree upon.

Plaintiffs’ counsel addresses the court regarding Grace Violette’s deposition. Counsel
advises the court that as a result of that deposition, Plaintiffs have requested additional
information from Defendants, even though the discovery deadline has passed. Counsel are
directed to confer regarding this issue to determine if there is a disagreement about the request.
Thereafter, counsel may raise the issue with the court, if necessary.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

9:12 a.m. Matter concludes.

Based on the trial setting, the court sets the following deadlines and makes the following
orders. The dates set forth in this order are firm dates and will not be extended or modified by
this court absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not ordinarily be considered good cause.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/21/2015

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

DUTIES BEFORE THE FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

MOTIONS IN LIMINE. All motions in limine shall be filed no later than 5:00 p.m. on
December 28, 2015. Written responses to motions in limine may be filed no later than 10 calendar
days after service of the motion. No replies shall be filed. The court may hear argument at the final
trial management conference or may rule without oral argument. The parties must comply with
Ariz. R. Civ. P. Rule 7.2(a) before filing any motion in limine.

JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT. The parties shall file with the court no later than
5:00 p.m. on January 8, 2016, a Joint Pretrial Statement, signed by all counsel (and any self-
represented party) and conforming in all respects to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 16(g), except as follows.

1.
List of Claims. The Joint Pretrial Statement shall contain a list of all claims (i.e.
claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, third-party claims, etc.) on which a verdict is sought. Such list
shall specify (1) the cause of action (e.g. breach of contract, negligence, etc.), (2) the pleading and
count in which such cause of action is pled, (3) each party asserting that cause of action, and (4)
each party against whom relief is sought.

2.
Summary of the Case for Jury Selection. The Joint Pretrial Statement shall
include an agreed-upon brief (generally less than 200 words) summary of the case for jury selection
purposes.

3.
Trial Exhibits. As required by Rule 16(g), all trial exhibits shall be listed in the
Joint Pretrial Statement along with objections. The court typically resolves objections to exhibits at
trial, but objections must be listed in the Joint Pretrial Statement to be preserved.

4.
Deposition Designations. As required by Rule 16(g), deposition designations and
objections shall be included in the Joint Pretrial Statement. The court typically does not rule on
objections to deposition designations at the final trial management conference. Rather, it resolves
them at trial as follows. By 3:00 p.m. the day before a party plans to read deposition testimony, that
party shall provide the court with a copy of the deposition transcript with the portions to be read
highlighted. The court will rule on any objections by the next day.

5.
Final Trial Witnesses. In addition, the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include an
exhibit entitled Final Trial Witness List, which shall list each witness a party actually intends to call
at trial, the day on which they intend to call that witness and the estimated time needed for direct,
cross and re-direct examination.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/21/2015

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

JURY INSTRUCTIONS; VOIR DIRE. The parties shall meet and agree on as many
proposed jury instructions as possible. The parties shall file with the court, with their Joint Pretrial
Statement, copies of:

1.
Proposed voir dire questions.

2.
Agreed-upon preliminary and final jury instructions and proposed forms of
verdicts.

3.
Separate sets of requested instructions that have not been agreed upon.
Recommended Arizona Jury Instructions (“RAJI”) may be referred to name without reprinting, but
if the RAJI contains options for the court the party should indicate which options it is requesting.

Jury instructions not requested by the final trial management conference will be deemed
waived unless good cause exists for the untimely request.

SETTLEMENT. The parties are reminded to promptly notify the court of any settlement
pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 5.1(d). One day’s jury fees will be assessed unless the court is notified
of settlement before 2:00 p.m. on the judicial day before the trial.

TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

At the final trial management conference, the parties shall be prepared to discuss:

1.
The claims and parties as to which a verdict is sought.

2.
The time designated for trial and, if necessary, time limits.

3.
Any scheduling or equipment issues.

4.
Voir dire.

5.
Any special issues regarding exhibits or deposition designations.

6.
Preliminary jury instructions.

7.
The case summary for jury selection purposes.

8.
Motions in limine.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/21/2015

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

9.
The potential for settlement before trial.

TRIAL EXHIBITS

Counsel (and any self-represented party) shall deliver all trial exhibits to the courtroom
clerk (602-372-3180) no later than 4:30 p.m. on February 1, 2016.

The parties shall present all exhibits to be used at trial, along with a written list of brief
exhibit descriptions, to the clerk on the date referenced above unless other arrangements have been
made with the clerk before that date. All exhibits will be clearly labeled by the parties to correspond
with the list provided. The parties should not reserve exhibit numbers for exhibits to be provided at
a later date, “all defendant’s exhibits,” “all plaintiff’s exhibits,” “miscellaneous demonstrative
exhibits,” etc.

The exhibits will be marked numerically and serially, plaintiff’s first and defendant’s
second. Before presenting the exhibits to the clerk, the parties shall meet and confer to eliminate
any duplicate exhibits.

Do not place exhibits in a notebook when submitting them to the clerk for marking and do
not provide the clerk with stacks of loose paper. Individual exhibits consisting of multiple pages
shall be bound by staples or two-prong fasteners.

Depositions are not marked as exhibits. But for any depositions the parties intend to use
during the trial, the original deposition transcript shall be provided to the courtroom clerk for filing
no later than the first day of trial. The depositions will be available to the parties and the court
during the trial, and will be retained by the clerk for record purposes.

In addition to providing a set of exhibits to the clerk, the parties may provide a second set in
a binder for the court’s use during the trial.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/27/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/25/2016

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

RULING

Before the court and fully briefed is Plaintiffs’ April 5, 2016 Motion for Declaratory
Relief, which follows a trial in which the jury found for Defendants on all claims. The instant
Motion concerns a claim for declaratory and injunctive relief that was not submitted to the jury.
Plaintiffs seek an order that the Association uniformly enforce the CC&R’s, and also seek
appointment of a special master to oversee all actions of the Association and its Board of
Directors.

Defendants raise a number of procedural objections, but it is unnecessary to decide them.
Based on the evidence presented at trial, the parties’ briefs and the affidavits attached to them,
the court finds that the requested relief is not warranted.

In support of this determination, the court finds:

1.
The Board has not selectively or discriminatorily enforced the CC&R’s.

2.
The Board has not violated the CC&R’s as alleged by Plaintiffs.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

04/25/2016

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

3.
Neither the Board nor the Association is deadlocked.

4.
Despite conflicts involving a small number of people, the Association is
adequately functioning and does not require court supervision.

5.
The members of the Association (which number approximately 174) have the
right and the ability to elect the Board members they want to run the Association in the manner
they see fit.

6.
Appointing a special master would be tantamount to the court running the
Association, since special master orders are subject to court review. The circumstances of this
case do not justify having the court run the Association.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants lodge a form of judgment and file any
application for attorneys’ fees or statement of costs within 30 days of this order.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/15/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

05/13/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

Oral argument having been requested,

IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on Defendants’ January 16, 2015 Motion for
Summary Judgment for June 15, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. in this division. Counsel and the parties, if
representing themselves, are to appear in person before:

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

Oral argument shall be limited to thirty (30) minutes with the time divided equally
between the sides.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

05/13/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Warner’s online profile of the Superior
Court’s website for additional information on appearing before Judge Warner.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/28/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

05/26/2015

Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

ORAL ARGUMENT RESET

The court having extended the response and reply times to Defendants’ April 30, 2015
Amended Motion for Summary Judgment by separate order,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the June 15, 2015 oral argument and resetting this matter for
oral argument regarding Defendants’ January 16, 2015 Motion for Summary Judgment and/or
Defendants’ April 30, 2015 Amended Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative
Partial Summary Judgment for July 23, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. in this division. Counsel and the
parties, if representing themselves, are to appear in person before:

The Honorable Randall H. Warner
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
5th Floor, Courtroom 512
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-372-2966
Fax: 602-372-8746

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

05/26/2015

Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 2

Oral argument shall be limited to thirty (30) minutes with the time divided equally
between the sides.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Warner’s online profile of the Superior
Court’s website for additional information on appearing before Judge Warner.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/01/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

05/27/2016

Docket Code 016
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

EXTEND TIME FOR FILING GRANTED

Before the court is Plaintiffs’ May 25, 2016 Motion to Extend Time to Respond to
Defendants’ Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Re the Proposed Form of Judgment.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion. Plaintiffs shall file any response and/or objection
no later than June 21, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/15/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/14/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

RULING

Before the court is Defendants’ July 1, 2015 Motion to Strike.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

Also before the court is Plaintiffs’ July 7, 2015 Motion to Enlarge Page Limits for
Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion in part. Plaintiffs shall file a response no longer
than 20 pages no later than noon on Friday, July 17, 2015. Defendants may file a reply no
longer than 15 pages by noon on Wednesday, July 22, 2015. Both the response and the reply
shall be emailed to opposing counsel and to the court’s judicial assistant.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/18/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/14/2016

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

JUDGMENT SIGNED

Before the court and fully briefed is Defendants’ May 17, 2016 Motion for Attorney
Fees, Expert Fees, Sanctions, and Costs. Defendants have also lodged a form of judgment. Oral
argument is unnecessary.

1.
Attorneys’ Fees.

A.R.S. § 12-341.01(A) authorizes an award of attorneys’ fees to the successful party in a
contested action arising out of contract. Defendants are the successful parties here, having
prevailed both before the jury and on claims adjudicated by the court. But only some of the
claims arose out of contract. Defendants may not recover fees incurred defending the tort
claims, which were not intertwined with the contract claims.

Considering all relevant factors, an award of attorneys’ fees for the contract claims is
appropriate. The court makes the following findings as to relevant factors. Associated Indemnity
Corp. v. Warner, 143 Ariz. 567, 694 P.2d 1181 (1985).

1.
Whether the unsuccessful party’s claim or defense was meritorious. Plaintiffs’
claims were not meritorious.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/14/2016

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 2

2.
Whether the litigation could have been avoided or settled and the successful
party’s efforts were completely superfluous in achieving the result. Defendants’ efforts were
necessary to achieve the result. Plaintiffs had the opportunity in 2014 to accept an offer of
judgment but declined to settle.

3.
Whether a fee award would be an extreme hardship. A fee award would not be
an extreme hardship.

4.
Whether the successful party prevailed with respect to all of the relief sought.
Defendants prevailed with respect to all relief sought.

5.
Whether the matter presented a novel legal question. This matter did not present
novel legal questions.

6.
Whether the award would discourage other parties with tenable claims or
defenses from litigating them. An award would not discourage parties with tenable claims from
pursuing them.

Having found a fee award appropriate as to the contract claims only, the question is how
to apportion Defendants’ fees among tort and contract claims. Although the claims were not
intertwined, the litigation of them was such that it is impracticable, if not impossible, to decide
on a time-entry-by-time-entry basis which tasks were for tort claims and which were for contract
claims. In this circumstance (which is fairly typical in mixed tort/contract cases), the most
reasonable approach is for the court to apportion fees based on its determination of the relative
percentage of the litigation devoted to contract and tort claims. This is not a precise science,
much like allocating fault in tort cases is not a precise science. But it best achieves A.R.S. § 12-
341.01’s purpose of fee-shifting only in cases arising out of contract.

The court finds 50% is a fair allocation of attorneys’ fees to the contract claims.
Although Plaintiffs devoted substantial time to their defamation and other tort claims, much of
their case had do with allegations that the Association either failed to enforce the CC&R’s or did
so selectively.

The court further finds a reasonable amount of total attorneys’ fees to be $280,034.00, of
which Defendants are awarded half. Given the expansiveness of Plaintiffs’ allegations and the
aggressiveness with which they pursued them, it was reasonable for Defendants to incur that
amount of attorneys’ fees in their defense. And the fee affidavits submitted are sufficiently
detailed to permit the court and counsel to assess the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/14/2016

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 3

Defendants are awarded $140,017.00 in attorneys’ fees.

2.
Motion to Strike.

Defendants move to strike the Declaration of Bruce Meyerson, which Plaintiffs submit
with their objection to the fee applications. Although part of that affidavit consists of legal
argument, which is not the proper subject of expert testimony, other parts of the affidavit are
appropriate.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

3.
Taxable Costs and Rule 68 Sanctions.

Defendants made an offer of judgment of $32,001 on December 11, 2014, which
Plaintiffs did not accept. There is no dispute that Defendants beat the offer and so are entitled to
Rule 68 sanctions.

Defendants seek $880.24 in taxable costs incurred before the offer of judgment and
double the taxable costs of $3,256.88 incurred after. Plaintiffs do not contest these amounts.

Defendants also seek expert witness fees under Rule 68, but Plaintiffs object that the
expert witnesses did not testify at trial. “In some circumstances, the fee for an expert who never
testifies may be includable as a sanction pursuant to Rule 68(g).” Flood Control Dist. of
Maricopa Cty. v. Paloma Inv. Ltd. P’ship, 230 Ariz. 29, 46, 279 P.3d 1191, 1208 (App. 2012).
Here, the reason Defendants did not call their experts was that Plaintiffs elected not to pursue at
trial the theory for which the experts were retained. Under that circumstance, Defendants’ expert
fees are properly includable as Rule 68 sanctions.

Defendants are awarded $880.24 in pre-offer costs, $6,513.76 in post-offer costs, and
$4,771.10 in expert witness fees.

4.
A.R.S. § 12-349 Sanctions.

Sanctions under A.R.S. § 12-349 are not warranted.

5.
Form of Judgment.

The court finds Defendants’ lodged form of judgment appropriate. Plaintiffs’ objections
to it are overruled.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/14/2016

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 4

Consistent with the above rulings,

IT IS ORDERED approving and settling the Judgment in favor of all Defendants and
against Plaintiffs Suzanne and Jeffrey Sallus and the Sallus Family Trust (jointly and severally),
electronically signed by the court on July 14, 2016. The Judgment will be electronically filed
(entered) by the clerk on July 15, 2016.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/27/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/23/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

HEARING

Courtroom: ECB-512

8:34 a.m. This is the time set for oral argument regarding Defendants’ April 30, 2015
Amended Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative Partial Summary Judgment.
Plaintiffs Jeffrey Sallus and Suzanne Sallus are present and represented by Counsel John Harris
(appearing in place of J. Robert Eckley). Defendants Bernard Potof, Joyce Strole, Ronald
Holewinski, and Rosie Holewinski are represented by Counsel Kathleen M. Langley and Larry
D. Langley, who also represent Defendants Sunrise Desert Vistas Property Owners Association,
Grace Violette, Liz Potof, and Ron Strole.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Oral argument is presented.

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

9:08 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/23/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

Later

Plaintiff Trust owns property in the Sunrise Desert Vistas development and is a member
of Defendant Sunrise Desert Vista Property Owners Association (“the Association”). Plaintiff
Suzanne Sallus was previously a member of the Association’s Board. The individual Defendants
are Board members.

This lawsuit arises from disputes between Plaintiffs and the Association and its Board.
Plaintiffs assert various claims. Defendants seek summary judgment on each of them.

Summary judgment must be granted on Plaintiffs’ fiduciary duty and negligence claims.
Neither a homeowner’s association nor the members of its board owe a fiduciary duty to
members of the association. See Rohde v. Beztak of Arizona, Inc., 164 Ariz. 383, 388, 793 P.2d
140, 145 (App. 1990) (homeowners association does not owe a fiduciary duty to a member of the
association). And Plaintiffs do not identify a duty of care that would give rise to tort liability. A
member of a homeowner’s association has no tort claim against the association or its board
members for negligence in managing the association’s affairs or enforcing the CC&R’s.

Plaintiffs point to Sections 6.13 and 6.14 of the Restatement of Servitudes, which state
that an association and its directors owe members a duty to use ordinary care in managing the
community’s affairs. But they cite no case from Arizona or elsewhere holding that breach of that
duty can be enforced by a tort claim for damages against the Association or its Board members.

Plaintiffs’ defamation and false light claims are based on the Association’s publication of
a May 7, 2012 letter from Chase Bank. Fact questions preclude summary judgment on whether
this letter is defamatory and whether its republication on the Association’s web site is privileged
or actionable. Because the claim arises out of Defendants’ May 18, 2012 republication of the
letter, it is not time-barred.

Summary judgment cannot be granted on punitive damages pertaining to the defamation
and false light claims.

Finally, Plaintiffs assert a breach of contract claim arising out of Defendants’ alleged
selective enforcement of the CC&R’s. If the allegation is true, the Association’s selective
enforcement of the CC&R’s can be a breach of contract, including a breach of the implied duty
of good faith and fair dealing. Summary judgment must therefore be denied on that claim. But
Plaintiffs have no contract claim against individual Board members because they have no
contract with them.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

07/23/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion in part. Summary judgment is granted on the
negligence and fiduciary duty claims, and on the contract claim as to individual Board members.
In all other respects, summary judgment is denied.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/05/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
08/02/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard
Deputy
JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JACOB A KUBERT
v.
SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF
LARRY D LANGLEY
ORDER OF THE COURT
The court having considered Defendants’ August 2, 2013 Request for Rule 16(b)
Conference,
IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall submit a joint pretrial memorandum and
proposed scheduling order as set forth below.
The court will review the joint pretrial memorandum and may adopt or modify the
proposed scheduling order, set a scheduling conference to resolve disputed scheduling issues, or
resolve the disagreements without argument. If the parties believe a conference would be
beneficial irrespective of whether there are disagreements, they should say so in the joint pretrial
memorandum.
If the parties fail to file a timely memorandum, sanctions may issue pursuant to Rule
16(f).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel are directed to meet personally to discuss all
matters set forth in Rule 16(b). Counsel shall file with the court by 5:00 p.m. on September 2,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
08/02/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
2013, a joint pretrial memorandum, and shall lodge a proposed scheduling order that includes
dates for the following items and conforms substantially with the attached sample order.
1.
A date or dates for initial disclosures and/or to supplement disclosures made to
date.
2.
An initial and final date to propound written discovery requests that shall
include, as far as can reasonably be anticipated, any and all medical examinations
which may be required of any of the parties; the person or persons to conduct such
examinations; and all tangible evidence to be disclosed or exchanged.
3.
A date for the initial and final disclosure of all non-expert witnesses, and/or to
supplement disclosures made to date.
4.
A date for the initial and final disclosure of the identities, subject matter, and
reports of expert witnesses, and/or to supplement disclosures made to date.
5.
A date for completion of all depositions.
6.
A date by which any motions to amend the pleadings must be filed.
7.
A date by which any discovery motions must be filed.
8.
A date by which any dispositive or partially dispositive motions must be filed.
9.
A proposed date for a mandatory settlement conference pursuant to Rule 16.1.
Alternatively, the parties may propose a deadline by which they will
participate in private mediation.
10.
The anticipated length of trial.
11.
Any other deadline or topics the parties wish to include.
If the parties agree as to the dates, they need only lodge the proposed scheduling order
and file a notice of lodging evidencing the parties’ stipulation to it. If counsel are unable to
agree on some or all of the items set forth in the attached form of order, they shall submit their
agreements in the form of the attached form of order and, as to any disagreements, state their
separate proposals and reasons for any disagreements. All proposed deadlines shall be set forth
as calendar dates, not in the form “XX days before trial.”

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
08/02/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3
The court prefers that lodged orders be in a word processing format that will permit it to
make modifications.
The parties are encouraged to view Judge Warner’s online profile of the Superior
Court’s website for additional information on appearing before Judge Warner.
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.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
08/02/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 4
[Proposed] Scheduling Order
The court having received the parties’ joint pretrial memorandum, and good cause
appearing,
IT IS ORDERED that the following deadlines shall govern this matter unless modified
by the court:
(1)
Initial disclosures shall be exchanged by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(2)
Written discovery shall be propounded by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(3)
Written discovery shall be completed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(4)
Final non-expert disclosures shall be made by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(5)
The identities and subject areas of expert testimony shall be disclosed by:
(MM/DD/YYYY)
(6)
Plaintiff’s final expert disclosures shall be made by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
Defendant’s final expert disclosures shall be made by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
Rebuttal expert disclosures shall be made by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(7)
Depositions shall be completed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(8)
Any discovery motions shall be filed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(9)
Any motions to amend pleadings shall be filed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(10)
Any dispositive motions shall be filed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(11)
The parties remaining in this action shall participate in private mediation by
(MM/DD/YYYY).
OR

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
08/02/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 5
The parties remaining in this action shall participate in a Mandatory Settlement
Conference (ADR) by (MM/DD/YYYY)
(Note: only one of the preceding two options shall be included in the
proposed order.)
(12)
The following number of days will be required to pick a jury and try this matter:
____
(13)
The provisions of subsections (a) through (g) of Rule 38.1, ARCP, shall not apply
to this proceeding.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the court will set one or more status conferences by
minute entry.
DATED:

_______________________________
Randall H. Warner
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/19/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

08/15/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

RULING

Before the court and fully briefed is Plaintiffs’ July 22, 2014 Motion to Amend the
Present Pre-Trial Scheduling Order Dated March 19, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion in part. The deadline for Defendants to disclose
the identities, subject matter and opinions of expert witnesses is extended to September 15,
2014. The deadline for disclosure of rebuttal expert opinions is extended to October 15, 2014.
All other deadlines shall remain in place.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/03/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

09/29/2016

Docket Code 002
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL L. BARTH
A. Aycock

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY
J P MORGAN CHASE BANK N A
PO BOX 183164
COLUMBUS OH 43218

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom: ECB 812.

9:26 a.m. This is the time set for Judgment Debtor Exam. No one appears.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

No one appearing,

IT IS ORDERED vacating today’s Judgment Debtor Exam.

9:27 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/12/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
11/06/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard
Deputy
JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
BROOKE LACEY FINDLEY
v.
SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF
LARRY D LANGLEY
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
STATUS CONFERENCE SET
Pursuant to the Scheduling Order electronically signed by the court on November 6,
2013,
IT IS ORDERED the parties shall participate in a mandatory settlement conference no
later than June 15, 2014.
This case is hereby referred to the Superior Court’s Alternative
Dispute Resolution Department 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 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, and all self-represented parties must personally appear and

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-007263
11/06/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
participate in good faith in the settlement conference. Sanctions may be imposed for failure to
participate.
If the parties decide to use a private mediator, and do not wish to use a court-appointed
judge pro tem for the settlement conference, they shall submit a stipulation and order re:
alternative to ADR no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 7, 2014.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a telephonic status conference on October 31,
2014 at 8:45 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division for the purpose of determining
whether the case is ready for trial and, if appropriate, to set trial. Plaintiffs’ counsel shall initiate
the conference call to this division at 602-372-2966. All persons appearing shall appear on land
lines and not on cellular phones, and shall not use the speakerphone features of their telephones,
in order to maximize all participants’ ability to hear and be heard. Counsel shall have their
calendars available for this proceeding.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in no less than five (5) days prior to the status
conference set herein, the parties shall submit a joint status report to the court that includes (1) a
very brief description of the case; (2) the status of discovery and other pertinent matters; (3) a list
of pending motions or other matters, whether at issue or not; (4) the status of alternative dispute
resolution; (5) when the parties anticipate the case will be ready for trial; and (6) how many trial
days the parties estimate will be needed.
NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division
(602-372-2966) three (3) court business days before the scheduled hearing.
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.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/20/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-007263

11/18/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. RANDALL H. WARNER
K. Ballard

Deputy

JEFFREY SALLUS, et al.
JAMES ROBERT ECKLEY

v.

SUNRISE DESERT VISTAS PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC, et al.
GUY W BLUFF

LARRY D LANGLEY

RULING

Before the court and fully briefed is Plaintiffs’ October 14, 2014 Motion for Leave to
Amend. Oral argument is unnecessary. For the reasons stated in the Motion and Reply,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion.

Documents