Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2023-008406: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Troon Fairways Homeowners Association.

Case Number

CV2023-008406

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

6/2/2023

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Minder, Scott

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/10/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

01/09/2024
CV 2023-012338

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
A. Walker

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA HUSTEAD
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
STEVEN A COHEN
ALICYN MARIE FREEMAN
A. DANIEL COUMIDES
JUDGE BLANEY
JUDGE COOPER

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received Defendants Troon Fairways’ Homeowner’s Association’s Motion
to Consolidate filed on November 29, 2023.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument regarding Troon Fairways’ Homeowner’s
Association’s Motion to Consolidate filed on November 29, 2023 for January 19, 2024 at 10:15
a.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes) in this division. All counsel and self-represented parties shall
appear in-person or via Court Connect before:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

01/09/2024

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable Katherine Cooper
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
7th Floor, Courtroom 711
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-506-8311

Court Connect is the Superior Court in Maricopa County’s new video court hearing
platform. For more information about Court Connect, please visit:
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting

Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590,,860084431# United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

For questions, please call Judge Cooper’s division at 602.506.8311, or email this
division’s Courtroom Assistant Brandon Powell at [email protected] or
Judicial Assistant Avery Vaughn at [email protected].

Oral argument shall be limited to 30 minutes with the time divided equally between the
parties.

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within 5 days or less of a scheduled event, the
party should also e-mail same to this division’s Courtroom Assistant Brandon Powell at
[email protected] or Judicial Assistant Avery Vaughn at
[email protected].

NOTE: All Court proceedings are recorded digitally 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.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

01/09/2024

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 3

Should you want an unofficial copy (CD) of the proceedings, please email Electronic
Records Services at [email protected] or call (602) 506-7100. Please note that
there is a $30.00 fee. To obtain a copy of a hearing on the day it is conducted, you must first fill
out a “Request for Daily Copy” form and pay the fee at the Court’s Law Library Resource
Center. Forms are available at the Law Library Resource Center. To order transcripts of digitally
recorded court proceedings, call Electronic Records Services for instructions.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/30/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406
CV 2023-012338

01/19/2024

Docket Code 053
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
M. Robinson/E. Wolf

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA KNUEPPEL
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
A. DANIEL COUMIDES
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
GEORGE A GOULD
JOSHUA TAYLOR GREER
STEVEN A COHEN
ALICYN MARIE FREEMAN
DOCKET CV TX
JUDGE BLANEY
JUDGE COOPER

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406
CV 2023-012338

01/19/2024

Docket Code 053
Form V000A
Page 2

CASE CONSOLIDATION

East Court Building – Courtroom 711

10:36 a.m. This is the time set for an Oral Argument regarding Troon Fairways
Homeowners’ Association’s Motion to Consolidate, filed November 29, 2023. Plaintiff Douglas
J. Cordano is represented by counsel of record, Steven A. Cohen. Plaintiff Merrick Avenue
Management, LLC is represented by counsel, Joshua Taylor Greer. Edward Trenton Albarracin
and Gretchen Marie Zamjahn in their capacity as Defendants are represented by counsel of record,
Alicyn Marie Freeman and in their capacity as Plaintiffs are represented by counsel, Joshua Taylor
Greer. Defendants Troon Village Association and Cornerstone Properties, Inc. are represented by
counsel of record, Quinten T. Cupps. Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association;
Jeffrey D. Kinney, Pamela D. North, Sanford L. Friedman, Amy J. Friedman, Richard S. Jaffee,
Linda K. Jaffee, Eric Gold, and Melissa Mack Gold are represented by counsel of record, Geoffrey
G. Collins. Defendant Amcor Property Properties, Inc. is represented by counsel of record, Tessa
Knueppel. Defendant MC General Contracting, LLC is represented by counsel, George A. Gould.
All participants appear virtually.

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

All counsel stipulate and agree to consolidating the 406 and 338 matters.

IT IS ORDERED granting Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association’s Motion to
Consolidate, filed November 29, 2023.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED consolidating cause numbers CV2023-008406 and
CV2023-012338 under cause number CV2023-008406 for all further proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED transferring cause number CV2023-012338 to the
Honorable Katherine Cooper for all further proceedings.

10:41 Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/05/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

03/04/2024

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
A. DANIEL COUMIDES
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE COOPER

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE SET

Pursuant to the Scheduling Order electronically signed by the Court on March 4, 2024,
and filed (entered) by the Clerk on March 5, 2024,

IT IS ORDERED setting a Trial Setting Conference on November 27, 2024, at 9:15
a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division for the purpose of setting trial, if the case is
ready to set trial. This matter will be heard by video/audio conference using Court Connect.
Court Connect is the Superior Court in Maricopa County’s new video court hearing platform.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

03/04/2024

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2

For more information about Court Connect, please visit:
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting

Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590,860084431# United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

All persons are strongly urged to appear by video instead of audio alone. For questions,
please call Judge Cooper’s division at 602.506.8311, or email this division’s Courtroom
Assistant Brandon Powell at [email protected] or Judicial Assistant Avery
Vaughn at [email protected].

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, no less than five (5) 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.

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within 5 days or less of a scheduled event, the
party should also e-mail same to this division’s Courtroom Assistant Brandon Powell at
[email protected] or Judicial Assistant Avery Vaughn at
[email protected].

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/02/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/01/2025

Docket Code 025
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE RICHARD ALBRECHT
L. Palmert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
MATTHEW D KLEIFIELD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Hearing, filed February 21, 2025.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/01/2025

Docket Code 025
Form V000A
Page 2

The COURT FINDS that Plaintiff must submit a proper Default Packet including a
Default Checklist and proper documentation.

The Court takes no action, including setting a hearing, until a physical Default Packet is
dropped off at the Division.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/09/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE RICHARD ALBRECHT
L. Palmert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT

MINUTE ENTRY

On the Court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED setting a virtual Default Hearing on May 14, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. in
this Division via Microsoft Teams/Court Connect.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 2

www.tinyurl.com/jbazmc-pcc07

You can also dial in using your phone (audio only).
+1 (917) 781-4590, Phone Conference ID: 604 064 885#

Commissioner Albrecht’s division prefers video appearances through Court Connect and
Microsoft TEAMS, if possible, as it ensures it is easier to know who is appearing at the hearing
and being able to see the other parties reduces interruptions and delays. Additionally, appearing
by video increases the chance that the Court can use features such as shared screens to show
everyone exhibits or forms that may be helpful for the hearing. However, no party shall be
penalized for appearing by phone. Whether parties appear by videoconference, phone, or a
hybrid of the two, they should try as much as possible to contact the court from an area with no
background noise as noise and echoes prevent the parties from hearing the proceedings in the
courtroom and prevent the court from making a good record of the proceedings. The parties
are especially discouraged from appearing virtually from an outdoor location.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if either party has exhibits to be marked, copies of all
exhibits shall be submitted online by end of business May 9, 2025 to the Clerk of the Superior
Court for marking at the following website:
https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/services/exhibits-submission. This webpage also
provides instructions and guidance for electronic submission. In the event that a party is unable
to access the internet to submit exhibits, they may provide them for marking at the Maricopa
County Superior Court, East Court Building, 101 West Jefferson, Courtroom 513, Phoenix AZ
85003 by end of business May 9, 2025. If exhibits are submitted through the Division, they
shall be marked numerically and consecutively. Do not skip numbers. Numbers will not be
skipped or saved in anticipation of additional exhibits to be submitted. Exhibits shall be
separated by a colored sheet of paper with the exhibit number written on front. Each exhibit shall
be clipped or bound if too large to be stapled. The parties shall also provide a bench (paper) copy
of their exhibits to this Division’s inbox located in the East Court Building Suite #513.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if either party wishes to have audio or video
exhibit(s) marked, the parties shall provide those in a digital media format such as a flash drive
or a CD, and deliver those to the Maricopa County Superior Court, East Court Building, 101
West Jefferson, Courtroom 513, Phoenix AZ 85003 for marking only by end of business May 9,
2025. The flash drive or cd will be marked as one exhibit. Please note that the parties will be
responsible for presenting their exhibits at the hearing/trial. The Court will not play exhibits from
the digital media devices for the parties. These exhibit(s) shall include the case number, party
submitting the exhibit(s), the hearing date and the judicial officer’s name. Any exhibit(s) that
were already submitted through the Clerk of Court’s online portal do not need to be included on
the flash drive.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 3

NOTICE: Exhibits submitted to the court for an evidentiary hearing, whether through
hard copy or submitted electronically, that are marked as exhibits but are not offered into
evidence at the hearing, will be destroyed following the hearing, unless a party requests that the
evidence be returned at the conclusion of the hearing. Such requests must be filed with the Court
and served on all parties in advance of the hearing or by no later than the conclusion of the
hearing.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally 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.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/09/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE MINDER

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court having received and reviewed Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’
Association, Kinney, North, Friedman, Weintraub, Jaffe and Gold’s Motion for Summary
Judgment, filed January 29, 2025, the Response, the Reply, and all supporting documents,

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument regarding Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment for April 30, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. (time allotted: 30 minutes) in this division. All counsel
and self-represented parties shall appear in-person or via Court Connect before:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable Scott Minder
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
7th Floor, Courtroom 711
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-506-0221

Court Connect is the Superior Court in Maricopa County’s new video court hearing
platform.
For
more
information
about
Court
Connect,
please
visit:
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting

Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590, 860084431# United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

All persons are strongly urged to appear by video instead of audio alone. For questions,
please call Judge Minder’s division at (602) 506-0221, or email this division at
[email protected].

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within 5 days or less of a scheduled event, the
party should also e-mail same to this division at [email protected].

NOTE: All Court proceedings are recorded digitally 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.

Should you want an unofficial copy (CD) of the proceedings, please email Electronic
Records Services at [email protected] or call (602) 506-7100. Please note that
there is a $30.00 fee. To obtain a copy of a hearing on the day it is conducted, you must first fill
out a “Request for Daily Copy” form and pay the fee at the Court’s Law Library Resource Center.
Forms are available at the Law Library Resource Center. To order transcripts of digitally recorded
court proceedings, call Electronic Records Services for instructions.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/08/2025

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 3

The Arizona Constitution requires the Arizona Commission on Judicial
Performance Review to conduct performance evaluations of superior court judges.
The Commission is asking for your help to evaluate Maricopa County Superior
Court judges currently undergoing performance review. After your hearing, if the
judge you are in front of is undergoing review, a survey will either be given to you
by court staff or will be emailed to you and you can take the survey online. The
survey is conducted by the Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State
University and is anonymous and confidential. Your participation in the review
process is important! More information on Judicial Performance Review can be
found at azjudges.info.

La Constitución de Arizona exige que la Comisión de la Evaluación del Desempeño
Judicial realice evaluaciones de desempeño de los jueces de los tribunales
superiores. La comisión pide su ayuda para evaluar a los jueces del Tribunal
Superior del Condado de Maricopa a quienes actualmente se les está evaluando su
desempeño. Después de su audiencia, si el juez frente a usted está siendo revisado,
el personal de la corte le entregará una encuesta o se le enviará por correo
electrónico y usted puede realizar la encuesta en línea. La encuesta es realizada por
el Docking Institute of Public Affairs de la Fort Hays State University y se mantiene
anónima y confidencial. ¡Su participación en el proceso de la evaluación es
importante! Para obtener más información sobre la evaluación del desempeño
judicial, diríjase a azjudges.info.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/05/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JOSHUA TAYLOR GREER
DEEANN MARIE BARNES
JUDGE MINDER

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD/UNDER ADVISEMENT RULING

East Court Building – Courtroom 711

9:15 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument regarding Defendants Troon Fairways
Homeowners’ Association, Kinney, North, Friedman, Weintraub, Jaffe and Gold’s Motion for
Summary Judgment, filed January 29, 2025. Plaintiffs Merrick Avenue Management, LLC;
Edward Trenton Albarracin, and Gretchen Marie Zamjahn are represented by counsel, Joshua

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

Taylor Greer. Plaintiff Douglas J. Cordano, who is present, is represented by counsel of record,
Steven A. Cohen. Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association; Jeffrey D. Kinney,
Pamela D. North, Sanford L. Friedman, Amy J. Friedman, Richard S. Jaffee, Linda K. Jaffee,
Eric Gold, and Melissa Mack Gold are represented by counsel of record, Geoffrey G. Collins.

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

The Court has received and reviewed Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’
Association, Kinney, North, Friedman, Weintraub, Jaffe and Gold’s Motion for Summary
Judgment, filed January 29, 2025, the Response, the Reply, and all supporting documents.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case and the pleadings in the case. The
Court has been informed of Defendant Amcor’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

The Court addresses the parties regarding oral argument. Discussion is held regarding the
same.

9:22 a.m. Joshua Taylor Greer leaves the courtroom.

9:22 a.m. Court stands at recess.

9:32 a.m. The Court reconvenes with respective counsel and parties present. Counsel,
DeeAnn Marie Barnes, appears virtually on behalf of Defendants Troon Village Association and
Cornerstone Properties, Inc.

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

The Court addresses the parties regarding appearances.

9:33 a.m. Tessa Knueppel enters virtual courtroom, appearing as counsel of record for
Defendant Amcor Property Processionals, Inc.

Discussion is further held regarding the status of the pleadings in this case.

Argument is presented.

Based upon the arguments presented,

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3

10:16 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On January 29, 2025, Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association (HOA),
along with individual defendants Kinney, North, Friedman, Weintraub, Jaffe, and Gold (Individual
Defendants) (collectively, Defendants), moved for summary judgment on all counts. The Court
has reviewed the motion, responses and reply, along with the associated statements of facts and
controverting statements of facts. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent items on the docket,
including the complaints. Oral argument was held on April 30, 2025. The motion is now granted
because Plaintiffs cannot establish that Mr. Gruchala, the shooter, entered the HOA through the
Happy Valley Road gate, the central allegation to their claims.

This case involves the tragic shooting of Mr. Cordano at the property of Mr. Albarracin
and Ms. Zamjahn. That property falls within the HOA. On February 18, 2023, Mr. Cordano went
to the property to administer IV injections to Mr. Albarracin and Ms. Zamjahn. Mr. Cordano was
shot at close range while parked in the driveway. At the same time, and for a period of time
beforehand, the gate at the entrance to the HOA was open. Plaintiffs’ claims against all defendants,
are based in negligence, and relate to the open gate.

The following facts are not in dispute:
 Mr. Albarracin and Ms. Zamjahn own property within the HOA (the “Residence”), at
25146 N. 104th Way in Scottsdale, Arizona.
 The Residence generally faces eastward and is on the west side of 104th Way, a mostly
north-south running street. Behind the residence to the west is a wall, and beyond that runs
Alma School Road, which runs generally north-south. To the north of the Residence is
some unkept desert area.
 The HOA has a contractual obligation with the property owners to maintain common areas,
including the gate at the entrance. The gate is to the south of the Residence and is
accessible from Happy Valley Road, which runs east-west.
 Near, if not directly adjacent, to the gate were (1) short walls that can easily be stepped
over, and (2) an un-gated path through the wall for golf carts.
 On February 18, 2023, the gate at the entrance from Happy Valley Road was not
functioning and was left open at the direction of Defendant Kinney, the HOA Board
President.
 The gate had not been operating for days or weeks prior to February 18, 2023.
 Mr. Gruchala entered into a business deal regarding his own home with Mr. Albarracin or
Mr. Albarracin’s company in the days leading up to the 18th.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 4

 On February 18, 2023, security cameras from the Residence recorded Mr. Gruchala
walking southbound on 104th Way from north of the Residence. One camera, which
appears to be a front-door camera captured Mr. Gruchala first. The security camera
covering the driveway then recorded Mr. Gruchala walking just past the driveway, still on
104th Way and still walking southbound.
 Seconds later, the same camera recorded Mr. Cordano traveling north on 104th Way and
turning left into the driveway at the Residence.
 As Mr. Cordano was parking, the same camera recorded Mr. Gruchala walking, then
running in the driveway and shooting into Mr. Cordano’s driver’s side window eight times
at point-blank range.
 The same camera recorded Mr. Gruchala running out of the driveway and northbound on
104th Way.
 A different camera overlooking the backyard pool at the Residence then recorded Mr.
Gruchala riding a bicycle southbound on Alma School Road.
 No video recorded Mr. Gruchala entering the residential area. Detective Dyer opined that
the backyard video was captured because there was movement from a dog in the backyard
and that the video of Mr. Gruchala on his bicycle might not have been captured otherwise.
The video shows dog movement in the backyard, three cars traveling on Alma School
Road, and Mr. Gruchala on his bicycle.

A motion for summary judgment should be granted “if the facts produced in support of the
claim or defense have so little probative value, given the quantum of evidence required, that
reasonable people could not agree with the conclusion advanced by the proponent of the claim or
defense.” Orme Sch. v. Reeves, 166 Ariz. 301, 309 (1990); Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1).

The party moving for summary judgment must produce evidence that it believes
demonstrates the absence of a genuine issue of material fact and must explain why summary
judgment is warranted. Nat'l Bank of Ariz. v. Thruston, 218 Ariz. 112, 115 (Ct. App. 2008). If the
nonmoving party has the burden of proof of the claim or defense at trial, the moving party need
not disprove the nonmoving party's claim or defense but need only point out the lack of evidence
on an essential element of the claim or defense. Id. at 117. If the moving party meets its burden,
the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to present sufficient evidence demonstrating the existence
of a disputed fact. Id. at 119. The nonmoving party cannot then rest on its pleadings but must call
to the court's attention evidence to explain why the motion should be denied. Id. “If the party with
the burden of proof on the claim or defense cannot respond to the motion by showing that there is
evidence creating a genuine issue of fact on the element in question, then the motion for summary
judgment should be granted.” Orme Sch., 166 Ariz. at 310.

A motion for summary judgment should not be denied simply on the speculation that some
doubt, scintilla of evidence, or dispute over irrelevant or immaterial facts might blossom into a

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 5

controversy in the middle of trial. Shaw v. Petersen, 169 Ariz. 559, 560-61 (Ct. App. 1991)
(quoting Orme Sch., 166 Ariz. at 309). Determining credibility, weighing the evidence, and
drawing legitimate inferences from the facts are functions for a jury, not the judge. Allstate Indem.
Co. v. Ridgely, 214 Ariz. 440, 444 (Ct. App. 2007). “Summary judgment is inappropriate where
the facts, even if undisputed, would allow reasonable minds to differ.” Nelson v. Phx. Resort
Corp., 181 Ariz. 188, 191 (Ct. App. 1994) (citing Orme Sch., 166 Ariz. at 310). “[I]f a material
issue concerns the state of mind or intent of one of the parties, summary judgment normally is not
appropriate.” Mid-Century Ins. Co. v. Duzykowski, 131 Ariz. 428, 429 (1982).

Gate at the Happy Valley Road Entrance

The inoperative gate at the entrance from Happy Valley Road underlies all claims against
Defendants. The complaints make clear that the HOA’s failure involved the maintenance and
operation of that gate. At oral argument, counsel for Mr. Cordano acknowledged the
same. Plaintiffs must, therefore, as part of their claim against Defendants, demonstrate to a jury
that Mr. Gruchala entered the HOA through the gate near Happy Valley Road.

Defendants, however, point to evidence showing that Mr. Gruchala came in from
elsewhere, namely from the area to the north of the Residence on the east side of Alma School
Road. The undisputed evidence shows valid reasons to believe this: (1) the security video showed
Mr. Gruchala walking southbound—toward the gate rather than away from it—on 104th Way from
north of the Residence to just south of the driveway, (2) the security video shows Mr. Gruchala
running out of the driveway and turning north on 104th Way immediately after shooting Mr.
Cordano, and (3) the security video shows Mr. Gruchala riding a bicycle moments later on Alma
School, heading southbound which is generally toward the gate.

Plaintiffs attempt to dimmish this evidence, pointing to Detective Dyer’s testimony that he
didn’t “know if there is evidence to support, either way, how he accessed the property.” Merrick
Ave. CSOF at ¶ 41. But that answer was given after he was asked to disregard his investigative
beliefs and instead focus on whether there was “substantive evidence of how he accessed the
property.” Id. The Court concludes that, given the context, Det. Dyer was essentially asked
whether video of Mr. Gruchala entering from the north or from the gate exists, or whether
witnesses saw him enter, rather than whether anyone could reasonably conclude Mr. Gruchala’s
point of entry.

The Court concludes that the video footage provides sufficient evidence, for purposes of
summary judgment, to shift the burden to Plaintiffs to demonstrate that a factual dispute exists. In
other words, Mr. Gruchala’s approach from the north and retreat to the north, coupled with his use
of a bicycle from the north, reasonably indicate that Mr. Gruchala entered from the north. Plaintiffs
must, therefore, provide some basis that would permit a jury to conclude otherwise.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 6

Plaintiffs admit they have no evidence that Mr. Gruchala came in through the gate. Instead,
they rely on the jury’s ability to infer that Mr. Gruchala did exactly that. Because the Court must
leave the drawing of all reasonable inferences to the jury, the only question is whether, in light of
the evidence presented, a jury could reasonably infer that Mr. Gruchala entered through the gate.

The Court concludes that a jury could not reasonably make that inference. To find
otherwise would require this Court to set aside Defendants’ video evidence, all of which strongly
infers that Mr. Gruchala entered from the north. (Again, he approached the house from the north,
left the house from the north, left the HOA property from the north, and had a bicycle at his exit
location from the north.) That means a jury would be required to infer that, unless Mr. Gruchala
miraculously found a bicycle at the point he exited the HOA property to the north, that he either:
1. Left a bicycle at that exit point before, in broad daylight, walking south outside of the
community on Alma School, a busy enough street where 3 different cars were seen in
the 35 second of footage provided, turned west onto Happy Valley until reaching the
entrance, which is not at the corner of Alma School and Happy Valley, walked through
the gate rather than hop the short wall or go in through the open golf cart entrance off
to the side, then walked along 104th Way, past the Residence, without triggering any
video footage from the same cameras that recorded him walking southbound, turn
around, and walk back towards the gate (now triggering that camera recording) before
opening fire on Mr. Gruchala, and then heading northbound to collect the bicycle; or
2. Biked in through the gate and past the Residence—again without being recorded by
either security camera—to stash the bicycle somewhere north of the house, walked
back southward on 104th Way, shot Mr. Cordano, the ran back to get his bike which
would have had to have been hoisted over the wall at some point, and biked away on
Alma School Road.
Either of these alternatives, or any derivatives, would leave jurors questioning why Mr. Gruchala
would maximize his exposure to others by walking along the streets beforehand or by walking
though the front entrance, why he would not just bike up to the Residence and leave on the bike
from the driveway rather than on foot, or a host of other logical doubts necessary to infer that,
given the evidence already presented, Mr. Gruchala came in through the gate rather than from the
north.1 Plaintiffs’ inference is not reasonable on the record presented.

Because a jury could not reasonably infer, and Plaintiffs have provided no evidence, that
Mr. Gruchala entered through the gate, Plaintiffs have not met their burden to establish any
evidentiary basis for the critical component of their claims against Defendants. Summary
judgment is appropriate for Defendants.

1 That Mr. Gruchala could have entered from the south but either stepped over the small wall or used the ungated
golf-cart entrance even further lessens the reasonableness of the inference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 7

Plaintiffs also argued that, because the gate had been open for days, weeks, or months prior,
Mr. Gruchala could have entered through the gate before February 18, 2023 to ascertain the
location of the house and understand the area. But the nature of the claims is not so broad. Again,
Mr. Cordano’s counsel admitted that his case would not fare well if evidence showed that Mr.
Gruchala came in from elsewhere on that day. Besides, maps and terrain are all easily accessible
online, and Mr. Gruchala had searched for the address online. Regardless, Plaintiffs have no
evidence that Mr. Gruchala ever entered through the gate before February 18, 2023. To infer
otherwise would be pure speculation.

Duty

For negligence claims, a plaintiff must, among other things, establish that the defendant
owed a duty to the plaintiff. Defendants argue that they owed no duty to any Plaintiff.

Duties arise from special relationships, public policy, agreements between parties, and
certain behaviors and interactions between parties. See Gipson v. Kasey, 214 Ariz. 141
(2007). Foreseeability no longer establishes a duty. Id. at 144.

Plaintiffs Merrick Avenue Management, Mr. Albarracin, and Ms. Zamjahn (the
“Albarracin Plaintiffs”) assert that the HOA owed a duty through their role as a homeowner’s
association and the contraction obligations under the CC&Rs. The Court agrees.

The CC&Rs, which apply to the Albarracin Plaintiffs and the HOA, states that the HOA:

[S]hall take appropriate action to manage, maintain, repair, replace, and
improve the Common Areas, together with all improvements located
thereon, to perform related activities, and to perform all other functions and
duties assigned to the Association by this Declaration, or set forth in the
Articles or Bylaws.

Merrick CSOF at ¶ 8. Section 6.01 continues:

The Assessments levied by the Association shall be sued for the purpose of
promoting the recreation, health, safety and welfare of the Owners . . .
including, without limitation, the improvement and maintenance of the
Common Areas, services and facilities devoted to this purpose and the
discharge of the Association’s duties under this Declaration . . . .

Id. at ¶ 9.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 8

As in Gfeller v. Scottsdale Vista N. Townhomes Ass’n, 193 Ariz. 52 (1998), this Court finds
that the allocation of duties in the CC&Rs results in a duty for purposes of a negligence claim. Id.
at 54. Specifically, the HOA has a duty to the Albarracin Plaintiffs, as property owners within the
HOA, to maintain the common areas, which includes the gate at the entrance from Happy Valley
Road.

Defendants argue against a duty, framing the duty as one to “prevent the shooting of a
stranger by a stranger on a private driveway” or one “to prevent an unforeseeable targeted
attempted murder that occurred on a private driveway.” But the issue of an intervening actor or
whether the ultimate shooting occurred on a private driveway does not eliminate the basic duty
owed to maintain the gate as part of the common areas. Defining the duty more specifically, as
Defendants ask, invites the Court to engage with breach and causation analyses. Parties may argue
about breach or causation, certainly, but the Court cannot intertwine an analysis of those issues
with the initial determination of duty. Perez v. Circle K Convenience Stores, Inc., ___ Ariz. ___,
564 P. 3d 623, 630 (2025). The appropriate approach, as in Perez, is for the Court to determine
whether the basic duties defined in the CC&Rs exist, not whether those duties extend to shootings
and attempted murders. That is a jury question.

As to Mr. Cordano, he is not a party to the CC&Rs, so any duty to him must derive from
elsewhere. He argues that he was a business invitee or visitor of a resident and this “special
relationship” affords him a duty. The Court disagrees.

Mr. Cordano cites multiple cases to establish that “[a] business visitor is a person who is
invited to enter or remain on land for a purpose directly or indirectly connected with business
dealings with the possessor of the land.” Cordano Resp. at 5 (citing Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., 131
Ariz. 143 (1982)). He cites McCaw v. Arizona Snowbowl Resort to assert that “a business owner
has a duty to both maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition and conduct its business in
a reasonably safe manner to avoid causing injury to invitees.” 254 Ariz. 221 (Ct. App. 2022). The
Court does not disagree with these principles.

But Mr. Cordano ignores that the HOA did not invite him to the Residence for the purpose
of business. The above citations show that any duty owed is one by the business with whom the
invitee is dealing and no evidence suggests that Mr. Cordano was asked to come to the HOA’s
property by the HOA. This is not a case where a larger property owner, such as a mall, has a
separate business interest in facilitating other businesses and therefore is maintaining common
space for those invitees. Indeed, the CC&Rs quoted above state that the HOA’s goal is “promoting
the recreation, health, safety and welfare of the Owners.” Merrick CSOF at ¶ 9 (emphasis added).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 9

Mr. Cordano next argues that, “[a] possessor of land generally has a duty to inspect and
make safe areas over which it retains control.” This is true in certain situations. For example, in
Siddons v. Bus. Props. Dev. Co., the landlord had a duty to invitees of a lessee to keep areas safe
that were under the landlord’s control. This principle would clearly, then, create a duty to repair
a faulty gate if, for example, Mr. Cordano had been injured when the gate unexpectedly closed on
him. But that is not what happened here; the gate is not the instrument inflicting the damage.

Still, the Court is weary of conflating a breach assessment with the determination of
duty. The Court therefore finds that the HOA had a duty to maintain the gate, as part of the
common areas, in safe order not only to the residents, but also to their invitees. Whether the HOA
breached that duty because it was inoperable or left open is a different issue.

Summary judgment would not be appropriate for lack of duty against any Plaintiff.

Causation

Defendants argue that Plaintiffs cannot establish any causal link between the gate being
open and the tragic and felonious acts of Mr. Gruchala. They point to the lack of foreseeability of
an extraordinary event. Plaintiffs cite ample case law stating that causation is a factual issue for
the jury and that the HOA was aware of prior incidents.

But this Court has already determined that Plaintiffs cannot establish that Mr. Gruchala
went through the gate. Plaintiffs therefore cannot establish that the open gate caused any
damages. Summary judgment is appropriate for the Defendants.

If Plaintiffs had a reasonable basis to conclude that Mr. Gruchala came through the gate,
then the Court would agree that causation should be left to the jury. Yes, a shooting and attempted
murder is unexpected generally, but evidence has been presented to suggest that the HOA knew of
prior security incidents potentially related to the open gate. Evidence has also been presented to
show that the HOA was aware of the added security created by a working gate.

Defendants argue that even if the gate was closed, Mr. Gruchala could have still entered
through the golf cart opening or over the short wall. And while that may be true, the Court would
decline to substitute its factual judgment for the jury.

Individual Defendants

Even if the Defendants were not granted summary judgment for the reasons stated above,
at least some of the Individual Defendants are entitled to resolution. Only Mr. Kinney and Ms.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 10

Weintraub served on the Board on February 18, 2023. Neither Plaintiff has established that any
other Individual Defendant had anything to do with the facts underlying this case.

Evidence presented links Mr. Kinney to the decision to leave the gate open. No evidence
links Ms. Weintraub to any action.

Summary judgment would therefore be appropriate for all Individual Defendants except
Mr. Kinney (and Ms. North as his spouse). Neither Plaintiff disputes this result.

Damages

Defendants argue that some damages claimed by the Albarracin Plaintiffs are not
recoverable because Plaintiffs did not witness the shooting and were not in the zone of
danger. Those are all elements of a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The Court
has reviewed the pleadings and does not find a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim in
any complaint. If Plaintiffs seek that claim, they will need to plead it.

Defendants also argue that some damages exceed the scope of tort recovery. The Court
declines to conclude on this record that the sought damages are inappropriate. A motion in limine
or a motion for an in-trial ruling may be more appropriate, especially given the summary judgment
rulings already contained here.

Conclusion

Summary judgment is appropriate for Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association, Mr.
Kinney, Ms. North, Mr. and Ms. Friedman, Ms. and Mr. Weintraub, Mr. and Mrs. Jaffe, and Mr.
and Ms. Gold because Plaintiffs cannot establish a factual basis to allow a jury to infer or conclude
that Mr. Guchara entered the HOA through the gate off Happy Valley Road. That means that
Plaintiffs also cannot establish any causation. Otherwise, this Court finds that the HOA would
have a duty to the Plaintiffs and that causation should be heard by a jury if, for whatever reason,
summary judgment were reversed. The same is true for damages sought by the Albarracin
Plaintiffs.

Regardless, summary judgment is appropriate for Mr. and Ms. Friedman, Ms. and Mr.
Weintraub, Mr. and Mrs. Jaffe, and Mr. and Ms. Gold because no facts have presented tying them
to the allegations of this case.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED granting the January 29, 2025 Motion for Summary
Judgment in favor of Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association, Mr. Kinney, Ms. North, Mr. and

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

04/30/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 11

Ms. Friedman, Ms. and Mr. Weintraub, Mr. and Mrs. Jaffe, and Mr. and Ms. Gold on all counts
against them.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/14/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/13/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
A. DANIEL COUMIDES
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE COOPER

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE RESET

Pursuant to the Order Re Stipulation to Amend Scheduling Order electronically signed by
the Court on May 13, 2024, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on May 14, 2024,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Trial Setting Conference set for November 27, 2024, and
resetting same to January 29, 2025, at 9:15 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division for
the purpose of setting trial, if the case is ready to set trial. This matter will be heard by
video/audio conference using Court Connect. Court Connect is the Superior Court in Maricopa

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/13/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2

County’s new video court hearing platform. For more information about Court Connect, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting
Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590,,860084431# United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

All persons are strongly urged to appear by video instead of audio alone. For questions,
please call Judge Cooper’s division at 602.506.8311, or email this division’s Courtroom
Assistant Brandon Powell at [email protected] or Judicial Assistant Avery
Vaughn at [email protected].

NOTE: Due to judicial rotations, Judge Scott Minder is assuming this calendar
effective June 21, 2024.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, no less than five (5) 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.

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within 5 days or less of a scheduled event, the
party should also e-mail same to this division’s Courtroom Assistant Brandon Powell at
[email protected] or Judicial Assistant Avery Vaughn at
[email protected].

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/19/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/14/2025

Docket Code 002
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE RICHARD ALBRECHT
L. Palmert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 513-VC-CV East Court Building

1:55 p.m. This is the time set for Default Hearing. Plaintiff does not appear.

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

Plaintiff not having appeared,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/14/2025

Docket Code 002
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED vacating today’s Default Hearing.

1:57 p.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/21/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/20/2025

Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE RICHARD ALBRECHT
L. Palmert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff Douglas J. Cordano’s Motion to Reset
Default Hearing, filed May 15, 2025. Good cause appearing,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

05/20/2025

Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED vacating the virtual Default Hearing previously set for May 14, 2025,
and resetting the same to June 19, 2025, at 1:30 p.m., in this Division via Microsoft
Teams/Court Connect.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED approving and settling formal written Order Resetting
Default Hearing signed by the Court on May 15, 2025 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on May
20, 2025.

Commissioner Albrecht’s division will handle all hearings remotely via video conference
through Court Connect and Microsoft TEAMS, unless Commissioner Albrecht grants a specific
exception in writing to conduct a hearing in person. Please join my meeting from your computer,
tablet or smartphone using the following connection information:

www.tinyurl.com/jbazmc-pcc07
You can also dial in using your phone (audio only).

+1 (917) 781-4590
Phone Conference ID: 604 064 885#

More information regarding Court Connect can be found at:
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect/

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded digitally 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.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/16/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

06/13/2025

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
E. Valadez

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE MINDER

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

The Court has received Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’ Association’s, Kinney,
North, Friedman, Jaffee, Weintraub, and Gold’s Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Entry of
Judgment; Motion for Attorneys’ Fees; and Verified Statement of Costs, filed on June 11, 2025.

Accordingly,

The Court will not address the May 27, 2025, Motions for Entry of Judgment and
Attorney’s Fees.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/24/2025 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

06/19/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE RICHARD ALBRECHT
L. Palmert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT

MINUTE ENTRY

Prior to the commencement of today’s hearing, Plaintiff’s exhibits 1-4 are marked for
identification.

Courtroom 513-VC-CV East Court Building

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

06/19/2025

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

1:34 p.m. This is the time set for virtual Default Hearing. Plaintiff Douglas J. Cordano is
present and represented by counsel, Steven A. Cohen. No other parties are present.

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

Douglas J. Cordano is sworn and testifies.

Plaintiff’s exhibits 1-4 are received in evidence.

Based upon the evidence and matters presented to the Court,

IT IS ORDERED granting judgment against Defendants, Patrick Gruchala and Carrie A.
Luikens, all in accordance with formal written Default Judgment(s) signed by the Court on June
19, 2025, and filed electronically (entered) by the Clerk on June 19, 2025.

NOTE: The above-mentioned judgment has been digitally processed. After the judgment
has been docketed by the Clerk of the Court, copies of this order including certified copies will
be available.

More information regarding how to obtain copies and/or certified copies of records may
be found here: https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/obtaining-records

1:47 p.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/25/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

08/24/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JAY RYAN ADLEMAN
L. Gilbert

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

SANFORD L FRIEDMAN
10477 E QUARTZ ROCK RD
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
AMY J FRIEDMAN
10477 E QUARTZ ROCK RD
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
ERIC GOLD
25499 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
MELISSA MACK GOLD
25499 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TROON FAIRWAYS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
C/O DENNIS C MAY STAT AGENT
16441 N 91ST STE 104
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85260
LINDA K JAFFEE
40231 N 107TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85262
RICHARD S JAFFEE
40231 N 107TH PL
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85262
JEFFREY D KINNEY
26291 N 104TH WAY

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

08/24/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
PAMELA D NORTH
26291 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
AMCOR PROPERTY PROFESSIONALS
INC
C/O DENNIS C MAY STAT AGENT
16441 N 91ST STE 104
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85260
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. CRONIN
JUDGE ADLEMAN

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

This Court has received Plaintiff’s August 23, 2023 e-filed Application for Entry of Default
against Defendant(s) AMCOR Property Professionals, Inc. in the above-captioned case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).

The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Richard Albrecht select one Mary Cronin.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a
default judgment must be e-filed.

Pursuant to the Maricopa County eFiling Guidelines, section 2.09, attorneys shall
electronically file all the documents required to request a default judgment, such as the Application
for Entry of Default, Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, Sum Certain Affidavit, and

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

08/24/2023

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3

Application for Attorneys’ Fees when appropriate and Statement of Costs, but shall submit a
default judgment packet required by the Court, including the documents identified on the default
judgment packet coversheet in paper to the assigned commissioner’s division. A commissioner
will not act upon a Motion for Entry of Default Judgment until the default judgment packet with
all the required documents has been received by the division in paper form.

The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked
questions at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDoI.asp

The parties/counsel can find additional information regarding the default judgment
process at: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/llrc/cv_cvc6/

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/15/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/14/2023

Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DANIELLE J. VIOLA
N. Johnson

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA HUSTEAD
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SCOTT CARPENTER
JUDGE ADLEMAN
JUDGE COOPER
JUDGE VIOLA

CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Jay R. Adleman, who has disqualified
himself. The case was transferred to the Presiding Civil Judge for reassignment.

IT IS ORDERED reassigning this case to Civil Calendar CVJ-20, the Honorable
Katherine Cooper, for all further proceedings.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/14/2023

Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all hearings set by the disqualified judge are
vacated, to be reset by the new division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly file within 10 days of the date
of this minute entry, a notice with the new division listing any outstanding motions (including
the file dates), whether they are ripe for resolution, and any hearings that need to be reset.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/19/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/18/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
T. Aird

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA HUSTEAD
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SCOTT CARPENTER
JOSHUA TAYLOR GREER
NATALYA TER-GRIGORYAN
COLE CUMMINS
JUDGE COOPER

RULING RE TVA AND CORNERSTONE MOTION TO DISMISS

Pending is the fully-briefed Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Troon Village
Association (“TVA”) and Cornerstone Properties, Inc. (“Cornerstone”). The Court has reviewed
the Motion, Response, Reply, and the Complaint.

In considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the Court construes well-
pled factual allegations and their inferences favorably for the non-moving party. Dismissal is

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/18/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

appropriate only if “as a matter of law []plaintiffs would not be entitled to relief under any
interpretation of the facts susceptible of proof.” Coleman v. City of Mesa, 230 Ariz. 352, 356
(2012).

Defendants argue that the “Complaint is devoid of any factual allegation which imparts a
duty upon TVA or Cornerstone” to maintain Common Areas and to install and maintain the gates
to the community where Plaintiffs live. Motion, p. 6.

The Court finds that the Complaint adequately alleges that the source of
TVA’s/Cornerstone’s duty to Plaintiffs is the TVA CC&Rs. It alleges that Defendants owe
contractual duties of care to Plaintiffs based on TVA’s CC&Rs. It alleges that Plaintiffs’
property is part of TVA and subject to the TVA CC&Rs; and that, per the CC&Rs, TVA (and the
Fairways HOA are responsible in part for Common Areas, including the gates at issue. Compl.
22-27, 31-33.

IT IS ORDERED denying the TVA/Cornerstone Motion to Dismiss.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/20/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/19/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
MATTHEW D KLEIFIELD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE MINDER

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE RESET

Pursuant to the Order Re Stipulation to Amend Scheduling Order electronically signed by
the Court on September 17, 2024, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on September 20, 2024,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Trial Setting Conference set for November 27, 2024, at
and resetting same to March 28, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division
for the purpose of setting trial, if the case is ready to set trial. This matter will be heard by
video/audio conference using Court Connect. Court Connect is the Superior Court in Maricopa

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

09/19/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2

County’s new video court hearing platform. For more information about Court Connect, please
visit: https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting
Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590,,860084431# United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

All persons are strongly urged to appear by video instead of audio alone. For questions,
please call Judge Minder’s division at (602) 506-0221, or email this division’s Courtroom
Assistant Maria Medina at [email protected] or Judicial Assistant Tonya
Blachut at [email protected].

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, no less than five (5) 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.

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within 5 days or less of a scheduled event, the
party should also e-mail same to this division’s Courtroom Assistant Maria Medina at
[email protected] or Judicial Assistant Tonya Blachut at
[email protected].

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/07/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

10/04/2024

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
MATTHEW D KLEIFIELD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
COMM. RICHARD ALBRECHT
JUDGE MINDER

DEFAULT REFERRAL

This Court has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Applications/Motions for Default against
defendants, Carrie A. Luikens and Patrick Gruchala, in the above-captioned case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above-referenced
document(s).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

10/04/2024

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

The parties are advised that commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Richard Albrecht.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a
default judgment must be e-filed/filed.

Pursuant to the Maricopa County eFiling Guidelines, section 2.09, attorneys shall
electronically file all the documents required to request a default judgment, such as the
Application and Affidavit for Default, Affidavit for Default (if the Servicemembers Civil Reform
Act applies and the filing party does not otherwise use the form Application and Affidavit for
Default), Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, Sum Certain Affidavit, and Application for
Attorneys’ Fees when appropriate, and Statement of Costs.

Attorneys and Self-Represented Litigants must submit a default judgment packet required
by the Court, including the documents identified on the default judgment packet coversheet in
paper to the assigned commissioner’s division. A commissioner will not act upon a Motion for
Entry of Default Judgment until the default judgment packet with all the required documents has
been received by the division in paper form.

You may wish to review the following resources for additional information regarding the
default process:

Applications for Default
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/llrc/cv_cvc6/

Motions
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/media/n30m54ah/gn10fz.pdf

Civil Default Checklist https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/media/jitjlp0s/cvc50fz.pdf

Civil Court Administration Processing Information
https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/media/wlojzc53/civil-department-post-filing-
information-and-instructions.pdf

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/16/2023 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

10/12/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER
N. Johnson

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
QUINTEN T CUPPS

GEOFFREY G COLLINS
TESSA HUSTEAD
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
STEVEN A COHEN
JUDGE COOPER

RULING RE AMCOR MOTION TO DISMISS

Pending is the fully-briefed Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Amcor
Property Professionals, Inc. (“Amcor”). The Court reviewed the Motion, Response, Reply and
Complaint.

Dismissal is appropriate only if “as a matter of law []plaintiffs would not be entitled to
relief under any interpretation of the facts susceptible of proof.” Coleman v. City of Mesa, 230
Ariz. 352, 356 (2012). In considering a motion to dismiss, the Court construes well-pled factual
allegations and their inferences favorably for the non-moving party. Id.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

10/12/2023

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

The Complaint adequately alleges that Amcor owed a duty to Plaintiffs. Construing the
allegations most favorably to Plaintiff, as the Court must, the Complaint infers a duty derived
from the obligations imposed by the CC&Rs on the defendant HOAs, board members, and
property owner.

This ruling does not mean that the Court finds that Amcor owed a duty to Plaintiffs, nor
does it preclude Amcor from filing a motion for summary judgment at the appropriate time on
this issue.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Dismiss.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/18/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

11/15/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
I. Ostrander

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
PATRICK GRUCHALA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
MATTHEW D KLEIFIELD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
CARRIE A LUIKENS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
JUDGE MINDER

TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE RESET

Pursuant to the Third Amended Scheduling Order signed by the Court on November 13,
2024, and filed (entered) by the clerk on November 18, 2024,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

11/15/2024

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED vacating the virtual Trial Setting Conference set for March 28, 2025, at
9:30 a.m. and resetting same to August 12, 2025, 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. This matter will be heard
by video/audio conference using Court Connect. Court Connect is the Superior Court in
Maricopa County’s new video court hearing platform. For more information about Court Connect,
please visit https://superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/court-connect.

Join on your computer or mobile app
Click here to join the meeting
Or call in (audio only)
+1 917-781-4590 United States, New York City
Phone Conference ID: 860 084 431#

All persons are strongly urged to appear by video instead of audio alone. For questions,
please call Judge Minder’s division at (602) 506-0221 or email this division at
[email protected].

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED 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.

NOTE: If/when a party files a pleading within five days or fewer of a scheduled event,
the party should also email same to this division at [email protected].

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/12/2024 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

12/02/2024

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE SCOTT MINDER
M. R. Diaz

Deputy

MERRICK AVENUE MANAGEMENT L L C, et
al.
CODY J JESS

v.

TROON VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, et al.
CHRISTINA N MORGAN

STEVEN A COHEN
GEOFFREY G COLLINS
MATTHEW D KLEIFIELD
TESSA KNUEPPEL
TODD D WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
SHARI L WEINTRAUB
25586 N 104TH WAY
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255
CARRIE A LUIKENS
12844 N PARADISE VILLAGE PKWY
W
#244
PHOENIX AZ 85032
DEEANN MARIE BARNES
JOSHUA TAYLOR GREER
YULINGXUAN LIU
JUDGE MINDER

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2023-008406

12/02/2024

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building – Courtroom 711

9:16 a.m. This is the time set for an Order to Show Cause Return Hearing regarding
Plaintiff Cordano’s Motion for Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Appear, filed November 8,
2024. Plaintiffs Merrick Avenue Management, LLC; Edward Trenton Albarracin, and Gretchen
Marie Zamjahn are represented by counsel, Joshua Taylor Greer, who appears virtually. Plaintiff
Douglas J. Cordano is represented by counsel of record, Steven A. Cohen, who appears virtually.
Defendants Troon Village Association and Cornerstone Properties, Inc., are represented by
counsel, DeeAnn Marie Barnes, who appears virtually. Defendants Troon Fairways Homeowners’
Association; Jeffrey D. Kinney, Pamela D. North, Sanford L. Friedman, Amy J. Friedman, Richard
S. Jaffee, Linda K. Jaffee, Eric Gold, and Melissa Mack Gold are represented by counsel of record,
Geoffrey G. Collins, who appears virtually. Defendant Carrie A. Luikens is present on her own
behalf. Defendant MC General Contracting, LLC is represented by counsel, Yulinxuan Liu, who
appears virtually.

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

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff Cordano’s Motion for Order to Show Cause
Re: Failure to Appear, filed November 8, 2024.

Discussion is held.

Discussion is held in regards to setting a deposition date. Ms. Luikens makes a request for
the deposition to be held in January in order to obtain counsel.

Based on the discussion held on the record,

IT IS ORDERED Ms. Luikens shall appear for a deposition on January 7, 2024, at 1:30
p.m. at 1850 North Central, Suite 1100, Phoenix, AZ 85004.

Discussion is held regarding failure to appear.

9:34 a.m. Matter concludes.

Documents