02/12/2020 — CV2019094581 AT MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, CIMARRON HILLS 02/12/2020 HONORABLE TRACEY WESTERHAUSEN View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/14/2020 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-094581
02/12/2020
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TRACEY WESTERHAUSEN
T. Haaser
Deputy
CIMARRON HILLS AT MCDOWELL
MOUNTAIN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON
v.
SCOTT T GREENWOOD
SCOTT T GREENWOOD
1600 SCRIPPS CENTER
312 WALNUT STREET
CINCINNATI OH 45202
JUDGE WESTERHAUSEN
MINUTE ENTRY
Grant of Summary Judgment to Plaintiff Cimarron; Award of Fees and Costs to Plaintiff
Cimarron; Award of Fees and Costs to Former Counter-defendant Cimarron.
1. Summary judgment for Cimarron.
Plaintiff Cimarron Hills at McDowell Mountain Homeowners Association sued Defendant
Scott. T. Greenwood for unpaid association fees and other damages. Defendant filed an answer
and counterclaim. Docket item 8. This Court previously dismissed Greenwood’s counterclaim.
Item 17
Cimarron filed a motion for summary judgment on its complaint, on November 14, 2019.
Item 15. Green didn’t respond until January 10, 2020. He didn’t argue that he didn’t owe past
association fees and other damages, but cited to poor notice of the damages on the part of
Cimarron. Item 23. His did not present any admissible evidence to dispute the amount due for
unpaid assessments. Cimarron replied. Item 24.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-094581
02/12/2020
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
The Court finds that Rule 56.e1 applies, and grants summary judgment for Cimarron.
2. Request for legal fees and costs for Plaintiff Cimarron.
Cimarron’s motion for summary judgment included a request for attorneys’ fees and costs,
under the contract between the parties and under A.R.S. § 12.341.01. But it was not supported by
affidavit, as Rule 56.c.6 requires. If counsel submits an application for attorneys’ fees and costs,
the parties’ opportunity to respond and reply is governed by Rule 7.1.a.3.
3. Legal fees and costs for former Counter-defendant Cimarron.
Counsel representing Cimarron on the counterclaim filed an application for attorneys’ fees
and costs, on December 31, 2019. Item 18. Greenwood didn’t file any opposition.
The Court has reviewed the application, and finds that that hourly rates are reasonable and
the itemization of services rendered is sufficiently detailed. Under A.R.S. § 12.341.01 and the
terms of the contract between the parties, the Court awards the former counter-defendant its legal
fees and costs.
4. Proposed form of judgment.
The Court requests that the parties await submitting any proposed form of judgment until
after a ruling on Plaintiff Cimarron’s application for attorneys’ fees, if one is filed.
1 “When a summary judgment motion is made and supported as provided in this rule, an opposing
party may not rely merely on allegations or denials of its own pleading. The opposing party must,
by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, set forth specific facts showing a genuine issue
for trial. If the opposing party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be
entered against that party.” Rule 56.e, Ariz. R. Civ. Proc.
10/29/2019 — CV2019094581 AT MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, CIMARRON HILLS 10/29/2019 HONORABLE TRACEY WESTERHAUSEN View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/01/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2019-094581
10/29/2019
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE TRACEY WESTERHAUSEN
M. Kay
Deputy
CIMARRON HILLS AT MCDOWELL
MOUNTAIN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
HEATHER HAMPSTEAD
v.
SCOTT T GREENWOOD
SCOTT T GREENWOOD
1600 SCRIPPS CENTER
312 WALNUT STREET
CINCINNATI OH 45202
EDITH I RUDDER
MARK W WALDRON
JUDGE WESTERHAUSEN
MINUTE ENTRY
Plaintiff Cimmaron Hills at McDowell Mountain Ranch Homeowners Association filed a
Motion to Dismiss against Defendant Scott T. Greenwood. Greenwood answered and
counterclaimed against Cimmaron Hills, for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
(15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.) and breach of contract. Cimmaron Hills moved to dismiss the
counterclaims. Greenwood did not respond. Cimmaron Hills asked the Court to summarily
decide its motion, under Rule 7.1.b.2, Ariz. R. Civ. Proc.
The Court has reviewed the file and the Motions. It denies the Motion to rule
summarily. For the reasons set forth in the Motion to Dismiss, the Court grants that Motion.
IT IS ORDERED directing counsel for Plaintiff to submit a form of Order consistent
with the Court’s ruling no later than November 18, 2019.
