Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2011-052807: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Solera Chandler Homeowners Association Inc.

Case Number

CV2011-052807

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

5/4/2011

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Cushner, Quintin

Location

Northeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

No parties captured.

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/21/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

01/17/2014

Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW

Deputy

SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
KELLIE J CALLAHAN

v.

LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249

NICHLAS P SPALLAS
JEFFREY L SMITH

CASE PLACED ON INACTIVE CALENDAR

8:20 a.m. Courtroom 108 NE. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference.
Appearing telephonically on behalf of Plaintiff is counsel, Kellie Callahan. Appearing
telephonically on behalf of Counterdefendant is counsel, Jeffrey Smith.

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

The Court finds that counsel for Defendants Nichlas and Christine Spallas is unavailable
for today’s Telephonic Status Conference. Accordingly, the Court will proceed with today’s
Telephonic Status Conference in his absence.

IT IS ORDERED that after conferring with Plaintiff’s counsel and/or listening to the
audio record of these proceedings, if Attorney Nichlas Spallas believes his clients have been
prejudiced in any way, he may seek whatever relief he deems appropriate on a de novo basis.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

01/17/2014

Docket Code 078
Form V000A
Page 2

Counsel for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant state their positions regarding the status of the
case.

Based on the positions of counsel, i.e., the parties’ anticipation of reducing their
agreement to writing and not waiting on the sale of the property,

IT IS ORDERED placing this case on the Inactive Calendar for automatic dismissal on
March 14, 2014, unless appropriate action is taken prior thereto.

8:27 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

THE COURT NOTES that the pro per Defendant Leonidas Spallas and Dawn Spallas
were not present at today’s Telephonic Status Conference.

IT IS ORDERED that if Defendants Leonidas Spallas and Dawn Spallas believe they
have been prejudiced by their non-appearance at today’s telephonic conference, they may seek
whatever relief they deem appropriate on a de novo basis.

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 ***
03/23/2012 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/19/2012
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE LINDA H. MILES
C. Kelly
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
JOSHUA M BOLEN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
JEREMY T BERGSTROM
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received and considered the following: (1) Stipulation to Judgment as to
Defendants BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP and BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, as Nominee
for Greenpoint Mortgage Funding Inc. (hereinafter “Stipulation”).; (2) Defendants Nichlas and
Christine Spallas’ Objection to Stipulated Judgment Between Plaintiff and Defendant BAC; (3)
Plaintiff’s Response to Objection to Stipulated Judgment Between Plaintiff and Defendant BAC;
(4) Defendants Nichlas and Christine Spallas’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Objection to
Stipulated Judgment; and (5) Defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s Response in Opposition to
Objections to Entry of Stipulation (hereinafter “Bank of America’s Response to Spallas’
Objection”).
Plaintiff and Defendants BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP and BAC Home Loans
Servicing, LP, as nominee for Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. filed the Stipulation on
October 27, 2011. In the Stipulation and proposed form of Judgment, these parties state that (1)
BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP currently holds first and second Deeds of Trust on Lot 58; (2)
BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP, as nominee for Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc., currently
holds first and second Deeds of Trust on Lot 131; (3) BAC’s second Deeds of Trust are inferior

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/19/2012
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
and subordinate to Plaintiff’s assessment lien rights as to Lots 58 and 131; and (4) Plaintiff’s
assessment lien rights are inferior to BAC’s first Deeds of Trust on both lots.1
Bank of
America’s Response to Spallas’ Objection states, however, that on October 14, 2011, MERS, on
behalf of the original lender (Greenpoint Mortgage) assigned the first Deeds of Trust to Bank of
America, N.A., successor by merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP. Because it appears
that at least some of the information in the Stipulation and proposed form of Judgment is
inaccurate,
IT IS ORDERED denying the Stipulation to Judgment without prejudice to submitting a
new Stipulation and proposed form of Judgment.
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.
NOTICE: Due to rotation of judicial officers, effective June 20, 2012, all civil matters
assigned to the Honorable Linda H. Miles will be assumed by the Honorable Michael D. Gordon.

1 Plaintiff also states in its Response to Spallas’ Objection that “there is no question that BAC Home Loans
Servicing, LP . . . holds both the first and second deeds of trust for Lot 131 and Lot 58 . . . .”

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

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

CV 2011-052807

03/20/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW

Deputy

SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
KELLIE J CALLAHAN

v.

LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3851 E SAN MATEO WAY
CHANDLER AZ 85249

JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
3131 E CAMELBACK RD
STE 230
PHOENIX AZ 85016
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
ROBERT J BRUNO

RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET

Having received Motion to Set and Certificate of Readiness, filed by Plaintiff on March
13, 2014,

IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference on April 22, 2014
at 8:30 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this Division:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

03/20/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable Michael D. Gordon
Maricopa County Superior Court
Northeast Regional Court Center
18380 N. 40th Street, Courtroom 108
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0762

Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling this Division at
602-372-0762 with all participating parties and counsel on the line at the date and time specified
above.

COUNSEL PARTICIPATING IN THE CONFERENCE CALL SHALL BE
KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE CASE AND ITS STATUS, AND SHALL HAVE
AUTHORITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT SCHEDULING AND OTHER
MATTERS RELATED TO THE CASE.

NOTE: The parties are advised that this Division does not set a trial date until completion
of private mediation or a settlement conference through a Judge pro tem.

IT IS ORDERED that should a party file for bankruptcy protection, he/she must advise
the Court under what Chapter of the United States Bankruptcy Code relief is being sought (e.g.,
Chapter 7, 13 or 15).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should this case be removed to Federal Court, and
subsequently remanded to this Court, the parties shall file a joint status report setting forth a brief
description of the case, the contested issues and the procedural history of the case. The joint
status report shall have, as an attached exhibit, copies of: (i) all pending motions, responses, and
replies; and (ii) District Court orders addressing substantive issues and District Court orders
addressing procedural issues that any party believes are relevant to the on-going proceedings
before this Court. The parties shall comply with this Order no later than twenty (20) days from
the date of its filing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if counsel representing a corporate entity seeks to
withdraw from representation, he/she must advise the Court that he/she has informed the
principals of that corporation that a corporation cannot represent itself in any court proceeding.

JOINT PRETRIAL CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM

IT IS ORDERED:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

03/20/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3

Counsel and any self-represented litigants are to meet personally before the Pretrial
Conference to discuss those subjects listed under Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 16(b)
or 16(c) (if a medical malpractice case). The parties shall prepare and file a Joint Pretrial
Conference Memorandum and Proposed Scheduling Order no later than five judicial days
before the conference addressing all applicable subjects listed under Rule 16(b) or 16(c), as
applicable, and including proposed discovery and disclosure deadlines. Proposed dates in the
memorandum shall be stated as dates certain (e.g., January 5, 2014) and not, for example, as
“90 days before trial.”

The Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum shall begin with a brief description of
the nature of the case and the contested issues, as well as the estimated length of the trial.
In addition, it shall include deadlines for the disclosure of expert and non-expert witnesses
and an agreed-upon schedule for completion of discovery. As far as can reasonably be
anticipated, each party shall set forth the depositions they anticipate taking and the
approximate time required for each; any and all medical examinations which may be
required of any of the parties; the person or persons to conduct such examinations; all
requests for production; and all tangible evidence to be disclosed or exchanged.

If the parties agree to the deadline dates, they shall prepare and file a proposed scheduling
Order in the form set forth below, containing the provisions which are applicable to the case. If
the parties are unable to agree on any of the provisions that are to be included in the Order, the
reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Joint Pretrial Conference
Memorandum, and the parties shall prepare and file a proposed Order without dates included.

Further, if the parties agree that a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is not necessary
because they agree on deadlines, they may file a joint motion to vacate.

If a Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum is not timely submitted, the Court may
place/continue the matter on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal. Counsel are reminded that the
Court may impose sanctions against counsel and/or the parties for failure to participate in good
faith in the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum or the Pretrial Conference.

NOTE: When the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum and proposed form of order
are eFiled, the proposed form of order must be submitted in Word format, not PDF or Word
Perfect format, to enable the Court to make changes/corrections thereto.

LANGUAGE FOR PROPOSED ORDER:

The Court has received and reviewed the parties’ Joint Pretrial Conference
Memorandum. In accordance therewith,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

03/20/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 4

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s final expert witness disclosure (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by , 20__.

2. Defendant’s final expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by , 20__.

3. Any rebuttal expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P., Rule
26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by , 20__.

4. Final non-expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P., Rule
26.1 (a)(3)) shall be served by , 20__.

5. All discovery shall be completed by , 20__. Any written discovery must
be propounded far enough in advance of this date to allow for responses to be
served in accordance with the Rules prior to this date.

6. The parties shall participate in private mediation by , 20__.

OR

The parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference. This matter
is referred to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution Office 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 self-represented litigants
shall contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange the date, time and
location for the settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is requested to
conduct a settlement conference not later than , 20__. The Office of
Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement
conference so please do not contact that office.

7. All dispositive or partially dispositive motions shall be filed by , 20__.

8. No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be allowed
at trial other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause
shown or by written agreement of the parties.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

03/20/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 5

9. A telephonic status conference is set for , 20__ at m. for the
purpose of setting a trial date, a Final Pretrial Management Conference, and a
Motions In Limine deadline if the case has not settled.

NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by
calling this Division at 602-372-0762, with all participating parties and counsel
on the line, at the date and time specified above.

10. Should any discovery disputes arise, any party seeking a discovery order shall,
prior to filing discovery motions, meet and confer pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 37(a)(2)(C). Counsel are advised that, as the Court interprets Rule
37(a)(2)(C), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in
extraordinary circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other
by telephone to attempt to resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the
Court. Counsel are further advised that after the personal consultation
referenced above, the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to
resolve this case in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1,
Ariz.R.Civ.P.

11. 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.

12. This case is removed from the Inactive Calendar and all requirements of Rule
38.1, Ariz.R.Civ.P., are waived until otherwise ordered by the Court.

13. In no less than five days prior to the Status Conference set herein, the parties
shall submit a Joint Status Report to the Court containing a brief history of the
case, the status of discovery, any outstanding discovery disputes, and the status
of the parties’ settlement efforts.

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 ***
04/01/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/28/2013
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
JOSHUA M BOLEN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3851 E SAN MATEO WAY
CHANDLER AZ 85249
JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
C/O ARIS J GALLIOS
1599 E ORANGEWOOD STE 150
PHOENIX AZ 85020
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
ROBERT J BRUNO
RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET
The Court is in receipt of Joint Motion to Remove Case from Inactive Calendar, filed
March 25, 2013.
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference on May 2, 2013,
at 8:30 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this Division:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/28/2013
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2
The Honorable Michael D. Gordon
Maricopa County Superior Court
Northeast Regional Court Center
18380 N. 40th Street, Courtroom 108
Phoenix, Arizona 85032
(602) 372-0762
Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling this Division at
602-372-0762 with all participating parties and counsel on the line at the date and time specified
above.
COUNSEL PARTICIPATING IN THE CONFERENCE CALL SHALL BE
KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE CASE AND ITS STATUS, AND SHALL HAVE
AUTHORITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT SCHEDULING AND OTHER
MATTERS RELATED TO THE CASE.
NOTE: The parties are advised that this Division does not set a trial date until completion
of private mediation or a settlement conference through a Judge pro tem.
IT IS ORDERED that should a party file for bankruptcy protection, he/she must advise
the Court under what Chapter of the United States Bankruptcy Code relief is being sought (e.g.,
Chapter 7, 13 or 15).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should this case be removed to Federal Court, and
subsequently remanded to this Court, the parties an hour file a joint status report setting forth a
brief description of the case, the contested issues and the procedural history of the case. The
joint status report shall have, as an attached exhibit, copies of: (i) all pending motions,
responses, and replies; and (ii) District Court orders addressing substantive issues and District
Court orders addressing procedural issues that any party believes are relevant to the on-going
proceedings before this Court. The parties shall comply with this Order no later than twenty (20)
days from the date of its filing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if counsel representing a corporate entity seeks to
withdraw from representation, he/she must advise the Court that he/she has informed the
principals of that corporation that a corporation cannot represent itself in any court proceeding.
JOINT PRETRIAL CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM
IT IS ORDERED:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/28/2013
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3
Counsel and any self-represented litigants are to meet personally before the Pretrial
Conference to discuss those subjects listed under Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 16(b)
or 16(c) (if a medical malpractice case). The parties shall prepare and file a Joint Pretrial
Conference Memorandum and Proposed Scheduling Order no later than ten judicial days
before the conference addressing all applicable subjects listed under Rule 16(b) or 16(c), as
applicable, and including proposed discovery and disclosure deadlines. Proposed dates in the
memorandum shall be stated as dates certain (e.g., January 5, 2014) and not, for example, as
“90 days before trial.”
The Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum shall begin with a brief description of
the nature of the case and the contested issues, as well as the estimated length of the trial.
In addition, it shall include deadlines for the disclosure of expert and non-expert witnesses
and an agreed-upon schedule for completion of discovery. As far as can reasonably be
anticipated, each party shall set forth the depositions they anticipate taking and the
approximate time required for each; any and all medical examinations which may be
required of any of the parties; the person or persons to conduct such examinations; all
requests for production; and all tangible evidence to be disclosed or exchanged.
If the parties agree to the deadline dates, they shall prepare and file a proposed scheduling
Order in the form set forth below, containing the provisions which are applicable to the case. If
the parties are unable to agree on any of the provisions that are to be included in the Order, the
reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Joint Pretrial Conference
Memorandum, and the parties shall prepare and file a proposed Order without dates included.
Further, if the parties agree that a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is not necessary
because they agree on deadlines, they may file a joint motion to vacate.

If a Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum is not timely submitted, the Court may
place/continue the matter on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal. Counsel are reminded that the
Court may impose sanctions against counsel and/or the parties for failure to participate in good
faith in the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum or the Pretrial Conference.
NOTE: When the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum and proposed form of order
are eFiled, the proposed form of order must be submitted in Word format, not PDF or Word
Perfect format, to enable the Court to make changes/corrections thereto.
LANGUAGE FOR PROPOSED ORDER:
The Court has received
and reviewed the parties’ Joint Pretrial Conference
Memorandum. In accordance therewith,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/28/2013
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 4
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s final expert witness disclosure (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by
, 20__.
2. Defendant’s final expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by
, 20__.
3. Any rebuttal expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P., Rule
26.1 (a)(6)) shall be served by
, 20__.
4. Final non-expert witness disclosures (in accordance with Ariz.R.Civ.P., Rule
26.1 (a)(3)) shall be served by
, 20__.
5. All discovery shall be completed by
, 20__. Any written discovery must
be propounded far enough in advance of this date to allow for responses to be
served in accordance with the Rules prior to this date.
6. The parties shall participate in private mediation by
, 20__.
OR
The parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference. This matter
is referred to the court's Alternative Dispute Resolution Office 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 self-represented litigants
shall contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange the date, time and
location for the settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is requested to
conduct a settlement conference not later than
, 20__. The Office of
Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement
conference so please do not contact that office.
7. All dispositive or partially dispositive motions shall be filed by , 20__.
8. No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be allowed
at trial other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause
shown or by written agreement of the parties.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
03/28/2013
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 5
9. A telephonic status conference is set for
, 20__ at
m. for the
purpose of assigning a trial date if the case has not settled.
NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by
calling this Division at 602-372-0762, with all participating parties and counsel
on the line, at the date and time specified above.
10. Should any discovery disputes arise, any party seeking a discovery order shall,
prior to filing discovery motions, meet and confer pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P.,
Rule 37(a)(2)(C). Counsel are advised that, as the Court interprets Rule
37(a)(2)(C), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in
extraordinary circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other
by telephone to attempt to resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the
Court. Counsel are further advised that after the personal consultation
referenced above, the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to
resolve this case in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1,
Ariz.R.Civ.P.
11. 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.
12. This case is removed from the Inactive Calendar and all requirements of Rule
38.1, Ariz.R.Civ.P., are waived until otherwise ordered by the Court.
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 ***

04/23/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

04/22/2014

Docket Code 375
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW

Deputy

SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
KELLIE J CALLAHAN

v.

LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
3131 E CAMELBACK RD
STE 230
PHOENIX AZ 85016
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
JEFFREY L SMITH

ORAL NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT
CASE PLACED ON DISMISSAL CALENDAR

8:30 a.m. Courtroom 108 NE. This is the time set for Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference. Appearing telephonically on behalf of Plaintiff/Counterdefendant is counsel, Kellie
Callahan. Appearing telephonically on behalf of Defendants/Counterclaimants Nichlas Spallas
and Christine Spallas is counsel, Nichlas Spallas. Appearing telephonically on behalf of
Counterdefendant is counsel, Jeffrey L. Smith.

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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2011-052807

04/22/2014

Docket Code 375
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court is advised that the parties have reached a full settlement.

IT IS ORDERED accepting the notice of settlement and setting this matter for dismissal
on June 6, 2014. Unless a stipulated judgment or a stipulation for dismissal, along with a
proposed form of order, is submitted to the court before that date, or the court otherwise extends
the deadline for good cause shown, all remaining claims and parties will be dismissed.

8:34 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
05/21/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
05/20/2013
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
JOSHUA M BOLEN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
3131 E CAMELBACK RD
STE 230
PHOENIX AZ 85016
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
JEFFREY L SMITH
LEONIDAS SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3851 E SAN MATEO WAY
CHANDLER AZ 85249
MINUTE ENTRY
Due to a conflict on the Court's calendar,
IT IS ORDERED changing the time set for the June 24, 2013, Telephonic Rule 16
Scheduling Conference from 4:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
05/20/2013
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2
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 ***
06/26/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
06/24/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
KELLIE J CALLAHAN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
3131 E CAMELBACK RD
STE 230
PHOENIX AZ 85016
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
JEFFREY L SMITH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
SCHEDULING ORDER SIGNED
REFERRAL TO ADR FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET
4:33 p.m. Courtroom 108 NE. This is the time set for Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference. Appearing telephonically on behalf of Plaintiff is counsel, Kellie J. Callahan.
Appearing telephonically on behalf of Defendants Christine and Nichlas Spallas is counsel,
Nichlas Spallas. Appearing telephonically on behalf of Counterdefendant Solera is counsel,
Jeffrey Smith (who has not yet made a formal appearance).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
06/24/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court has received the parties’ Rule 16(b) Joint Pretrial Memorandum and
accompanying proposed form of order.
The Court understands that the parties stipulate to the deadlines reflected in their Rule
16(b) Joint Pretrial Memorandum and proposed form of order.
Discussion is held.
By agreement of the parties,
IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference.
This case is referred to the court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Office for the appointment of
a judge pro tempore to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel and/or parties will receive a
minute entry from ADR appointing the judge pro tempore. Counsel and any self-represented
litigants shall contact the appointed judge pro tempore to arrange the date, time and location for
the settlement conference. The judge pro tempore is requested to conduct a settlement
conference not later than October 25, 2013. The Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution will
not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not contact that office.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED approving and settling the formal written Order which is
signed by the Court on June 24, 2013 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on June 24, 2013.
Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped envelopes were
not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and docketed by the
Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:
1. No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be allowed
at trial other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause
shown or by written agreement of the parties.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
06/24/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 3
2. A telephonic status conference is set for November 1, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. for 15
minutes before Judge Michael D. Gordon for the purpose of assigning a trial
date if the case has not settled.
NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by
calling the Court at 602-372-0762, with all participating parties and counsel on
the line at the date and time specified above.
3. Should any discovery disputes arise, any party seeking a discovery order shall,
prior to filing discovery motions, meet and confer pursuant to Rule 37(a)(2)(C)
of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel are advised that, as the Court
interprets Rule 37(a)(2)(C), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is
not sufficient to satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule,
except in extraordinary circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to
each other by telephone to attempt to resolve the dispute in good faith before
involving the Court. After personal consultation, the parties are encouraged to
call the Court, by joint telephone call, to address discovery disputes in order to
resolve issues in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner. See Ariz. R. Civ.
Proc., R.1 (2013).
4. If the parties agree to extensions for time to respond or reply to motions, they
are to advise the Court in writing in order to avoid premature rulings. See, e.g.,
Ariz. R. Civ. Proc., R.7.1 (2013). Further, the parties are encouraged to call the
Court if a motion has been fully briefed—that is, the time has expired for a
response or reply—and a ruling has not been made within 21 days.
5. The dates set forth in the Scheduling 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.
6. This case is removed from the Inactive Calendar and all requirements of Rule
38.1, Ariz.R.Civ.P., are waived until otherwise ordered by the Court.
7. In no less than five days prior to the Status Conference set herein, the parties
shall submit a Joint Status Report to the Court containing a brief history of the
case, the status of discovery, any outstanding discovery disputes, and the status
of the parties’ settlement efforts.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
06/24/2013
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 4
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if counsel representing a corporate entity seeks to
withdraw from representation, he/she must advise the Court that he/she has informed the
principals of that corporation that a corporation cannot represent itself in any court proceeding.
4:42 p.m. Matter concludes.
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 ***
10/02/2012 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
10/01/2012
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
JOSHUA M BOLEN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
C/O ARIS J GALLIOS
1599 E ORANGEWOOD STE 150
PHOENIX AZ 85020
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
ROBERT J BRUNO
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Expedited Motion to
Continue Case on Inactive Calendar and Notice of Settlement as to Count II of Plaintiff’s
Complaint Only, filed September 14, 2012.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Expedited Motion to
Continue Case on the Inactive Calendar.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing this matter on the Inactive Calendar for
dismissal on December 28, 2012, without further notice, absent further order of the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
10/01/2012
Docket Code 084
Form V000A
Page 2
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 ***
10/07/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
10/04/2013
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE MICHAEL D. GORDON
M. MINKOW
Deputy
SOLERA CHANDLER HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
KELLIE J CALLAHAN
v.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS, et al.
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
3851 E SAN MATEO WAY
CHANDLER AZ 85249
JEREMY T BERGSTROM
GALLIOS & BOLAND P C
3131 E CAMELBACK RD
STE 230
PHOENIX AZ 85016
NICHLAS P SPALLAS
DAWN SPALLAS
LEONIDAS P SPALLAS
3840 E SAW TOOTH DR
CHANDLER AZ 85249
ROBERT J BRUNO
RORIC MASSEY
ORDER SIGNED
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Order to Extend Deadline to
Participate in Settlement Conference (no later than January 10, 2014) signed by the Court on
October 4, 2013, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on October 4, 2013.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2011-052807
10/04/2013
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the November 1, 2013 Telephonic Status
Conference and resetting same on January 17, 2014, at 8:15 a.m. for 15 minutes. Counsel for
Plaintiff(s) shall initiate the telephonic conference by first arranging the presence of all other
counsel/parties on the conference call and by calling this Division at 602-372-0762 promptly at
the scheduled time.
Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.
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.

Documents