Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2015-055714: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Terramar Homeowners Association.

Case Number

CV2015-055714

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

6/22/2015

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Cushner, Quintin

Location

Northeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/13/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

01/12/2017

Docket Code 314
Form V314A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

BANKRUPTCY FILED

The Court has received notification that a petition under the Bankruptcy Code has been
filed by Defendant/Counterclaimant Douglas Rhoads (debtor) in case number 2:14-bk-00144-PS.

IT IS ORDERED placing this case/claim(s) on the Dismissal Calendar until July 11, 2017
(180 days) as to Defendant/Counterclaimant Douglas Rhoads (debtor).

This case/claim(s) will be dismissed on July 12, 2017 unless prior to the scheduled
dismissal date plaintiff demonstrates he/she/they/it have moved to lift the stay but the request has
not been ruled upon or has been denied; or he/she/they/it have sought to reduce the claim(s)
against the debtor to judgment in the Bankruptcy Court in an adversary proceeding and the
adversary proceeding has not yet been resolved despite diligence in seeking such a resolution; or
he/she/they/it have obtained severance of the claim(s) against the debtor from the claim(s)
against the other parties to the action, if any; or he/she/they/it have demonstrated a reasonable
basis for continuance of the case on the dismissal calendar.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

01/12/2017

Docket Code 314
Form V314A
Page 2

Any party may ask the Court to schedule an informal status conference before the 180-
day period expires to inform the Court what action, if any, is undertaken in the Bankruptcy Court
that would permit this case to proceed.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/30/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

01/20/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

RULING

The Court has read and considered Plaintiff’s/Counter Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (filed November 30 2016), Plaintiff’s/Counter Defendant’s Separate Statement of
Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and exhibits thereto(filed November 30,
2016), Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Disposition (filed January 18, 2017 ) and Coutner
Defendant’s Notice of Dismissal of Bankruptcy Filing and Request for Summary Judgment and
Motion for Summary Disposition (filed January 18, 2017) Defendant/Counterclaimant has not
filed a written memorandum in opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment.

“A failure to respond to a Motion for Summary Judgment with a written memorandum or
opposing affidavits cannot, by itself, entitle the moving party to summary judgment. The trial
court must consider the entire record before deciding a summary judgment motion.” Schwab v.
Ames Const., 207 Ariz. 56, 60, 83P.3d 56, 60 (App. 2004).

Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on all or any part of a claim or defense.
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Western Corrections Croup, Inc. v. Tierney,208 Ariz. 583, 586, 96 P. 3d

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

01/20/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

1070, 1073 (App. 2004), Samsel v. Allstate Ins., 204 Ariz. 1, 4, 59 P. 3d 281, 284 (App. 2002).
The party moving for summary judgment has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine
dispute of fact. Wells Fargo v. Allen, 231 Ariz. 209, 213, 292 P. 3d 195, 199 (App. 2012).
When the moving party makes the necessary showing that no material facts are genuinely in
dispute, the adverse party cannot rest on the pleadings but must show by competent evidence the
existence of a genuine dispute of material fact requiring a trial. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(4); Schwab
v. Ames Const. 207 Ariz. at, 60, 83 P.3d at 60 (App. 2004); Kelly v. NationsBanc Mortgage
Corp.,199 Ariz. 284, 287, 17 P.3d 790, 793 (App. 2000).

In considering the motion, the Court must view all facts and reasonable inferences
flowing from those facts in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary
judgment is sought. Gipson v. Casey, 214 Ariz. 141, 142, 150 P.3d 228, 229 (2007); Meyers v.
City of Tempe, 212 Ariz. 128, 130, 148 P.3d 751, 753 (2006); Nat’l Bank of Ariz. V. Thruston,
218 Ariz. 112, 116, 180 P.3d 977, 981 (app. 2008). The motion should only 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 School v. Reeves, 166 Ariz. 301, 309,
802 P.2d 1000, 1008 (1990). In making this determination, the Arizona Supreme Court has
cautioned that “[s]ummary judgment should not be used as a substitute for jury trials, simply
because the trial judge may believe the moving party will probably win the jury’s verdict, nor
even when the trial judge believes the moving party should win the jury’s verdict.” Id. 166 Ariz.
at 210, 802 P.2d at 1009 (emphasis in original). However, a Motion for Summary Judgment
should not be denied “simply on the speculation that some slight doubt…some scintilla of
evidence or some dispute over irrelevant or immaterial facts might blossom into a real
controversy in the midst of trial.” Id.

Therefore, considering all facts and reasonable inferences flowing from those facts in the
light most favorable to the Defendant/Counterclaimant, the court finds that there are no genuine
issues of material fact.

The Court finds that Summary judgment is appropriate as A.R.S. Sec. 33-1807 and the
homeowners association’s governing documents provide for payment of assessments, late fees,
costs of collection and attorneys’ fees incurred in collecting assessments, and there is no dispute
that Defendant has not paid all of the amounts that he owes to the homeowners association. The
Court further finds that Defendant has failed to produce or disclose any evidence to support his
counterclaims, and the evidence developed by the homeowners association directly refutes the
counterclaims that Defendant has filed in this Court.

Therefore,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

01/20/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

As there are no issue of material fact, and the homeowners association is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s and Counter Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the counsel for Plaintiff submit a proposed judgment
consistent with this ruling no later than February 3, 2017.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED awarding Plaintiff and Counter Defendant attorney’s fees
incurred in this matter.

IT IS ORDERED that counsel for Plaintiff and Counter Defendant submit a proposed
form of order and supporting affidavit to this Court no later than February 3, 2017.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/08/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

02/07/2017

Docket Code 314
Form V314A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

BANKRUPTCY FILED

The Court has received notification that a petition under the Bankruptcy Code has been
filed by Defendant/Counterclaimant Douglas Rhoads (debtor) in case number Case 2:17-bk-
00144-PS was reinstated on January 18, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED placing this case/claim(s) on the Dismissal Calendar until August 7,
2017 (180 days) as to Defendant/Counterclaimant Douglas Rhoads (debtor).

This case/claim(s) will be dismissed on August 8, 2017 unless prior to the scheduled
dismissal date plaintiff demonstrates he/she/they/it have moved to lift the stay but the request has
not been ruled upon or has been denied; or he/she/they/it have sought to reduce the claim(s)
against the debtor to judgment in the Bankruptcy Court in an adversary proceeding and the
adversary proceeding has not yet been resolved despite diligence in seeking such a resolution; or
he/she/they/it have obtained severance of the claim(s) against the debtor from the claim(s)
against the other parties to the action, if any; or he/she/they/it have demonstrated a reasonable
basis for continuance of the case on the dismissal calendar.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

02/07/2017

Docket Code 314
Form V314A
Page 2

Any party may ask the Court to schedule an informal status conference before the 180-
day period expires to inform the Court what action, if any, is undertaken in the Bankruptcy Court
that would permit this case to proceed.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/16/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

05/12/2016

Docket Code 023
Form J000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER BRIAN S. REES
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

MINUTE ENTRY

A review of this division’s e-filing docket shows that your office e-filed a Motion for
Entry of Default Judgment and associated documents on April 8, 2016, but that you did not
follow up by lodging a hard copy of all required documents, as required by the governing rule,
Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117. Under that rule, counsel must
e-file all documents in all civil cases, including documents which must be filed to obtain a
default judgment. However, when counsel are ready to ask for a default judgment, whether by
motion or by hearing, counsel must lodge a hard copy default judgment packet including
conformed (e-filed) copies of all required documents.*

As of this date, this division has not received the hard copy packet to process and enter
the default judgment. Please submit the hard copy packet as soon as possible so the Court can
take the appropriate action. The matter will not be deemed formally “submitted” to the Court
until you comply with the Supreme Court rule referred to above as more fully explained in this
minute entry.

Accordingly, counsel is directed to hand-deliver a hard copy packet including the default
coversheet and copies of the necessary e-filed documents and at least two copies of the default
judgment to the commissioner’s division for the entry of the default judgment.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

05/12/2016

Docket Code 023
Form J000
Page 2

OR if counsel is no longer requesting a ruling on the Motion for Entry of Default
Judgment, then a Motion to Withdraw the pleading and associated documents should be filed as
soon as possible.

**Required documents include, but are not limited to, affidavit(s) of service of the
summons and complaint, any supplemental affidavits required to support service by publication
or service out of state, copy of any order allowing alternative service, Rule 55(a) application for
entry of default showing proof of service of same, the Rule 55(b)(1) motion for entry of default
judgment (if any), any sum certain affidavit, any application for attorneys’ fees (including
“China Doll” affidavit and a copy of any contract provision providing for a fee award, taking
care to highlight the applicable language) (defaults are normally not considered “contested
matters” under ARS 12-341.01), copy of any contract provision supporting an award of interest
other than at the legal rate with controlling language highlighted, and any statement of costs.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/14/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

06/13/2016

Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
E. Morgenstern

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

DISMISSAL MINUTE ENTRY

A Notice of Dismissal With Prejudice as to Defendant Shannon Noelle Rhoads only,
having been presented to the Court; and good cause appearing,

DISPOSITION:

Pursuant to Rule 41(a), ARCP, the dismissal is effective without court order.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

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

CV 2015-055714

07/06/2015

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT C. HOUSER
E. Morgenstern

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
PENNY L KOEPKE

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

U S BANK N A
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
2525 S MCCLINTOCK L L C
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
SHANNON NOELLE RHOADS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

JUDGMENT SIGNED

The Court has considered the parties’ Stipulation to Judgment as to Defendant, 2525 S.
McClintock, LLC.

Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting Judgment against Defendant, 2525 S. McClintock, LLC, all as
set forth in formal Judgment signed by the Court on July 2, 2015, and filed (entered) with the
clerk on July 6, 2015.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/11/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

08/10/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
KATHRYN A BATTOCK

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court is in receipt of Motion for Summary Disposition filed by Counterdefendant
Terramar Homeowners Association (“Association”) on August 7, 2017, in which the Association
requests this Court to rule summarily on its Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on November
30, 2016—as it pertains to the Counterclaimant’s counterclaims only.

The Court is also in receipt of Motion for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice filed by
Counterdefendant Terramar Homeowners Association on August 7, 2017, as the Association’s
affirmative claims are now moot.

As a matter of housekeeping, in light of Defendant/Counterclaimant Douglas Rhoad’s
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy petition being reinstated on January 18, 2017, the Court finds that this
Court’s minute entry order dated January 20, 2017 (file stamped January 30, 2017) previously
granting the November 30, 2016 Motion for Summary Judgment is void.

Therefore,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

08/10/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED that this Court’s minute entry order dated January 20, 2017 (file
stamped January 30, 2017) be struck from the record.

Pursuant to the Association’s Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice,

IT IS ORDERED dismissing the Association’s Complaint (affirmative claim) with
prejudice.

As to the Counterclaimant’s Counterclaim only:

The Court has read and considered Plaintiff’s/Counter Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (filed November 30, 2016), Plaintiff’s/Counter Defendant’s Separate Statement of
Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and exhibits thereto (filed November 30,
2016), Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Disposition (filed August 7, 2017)

Defendant/Counterclaimant has not filed a written memorandum in opposition to the
Motion for Summary Judgment.

“A failure to respond to a motion for summary judgment with a written memorandum or
opposing affidavits cannot, by itself, entitle the moving party to summary judgment. The trial
court must consider the entire record before deciding a summary judgment motion.” Schwab v.
Ames Const., 207 Ariz. 56, 60, 83P.3d 56, 60 (App. 2004).

Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on all or any part of a claim or defense.
Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Western Corrections Croup, Inc. v. Tierney,208 Ariz. 583, 586, 96 P. 3d
1070, 1073 (App. 2004), Samsel v. Allstate Ins., 204 Ariz. 1, 4, 59 P. 3d 281, 284 (App. 2002).
The party moving for summary judgment has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine
dispute of fact. Wells Fargo v. Allen, 231 Ariz. 209, 213, 292 P. 3d 195, 199 (App. 2012).
When the moving party makes the necessary showing that no material facts are genuinely in
dispute, the adverse party cannot rest on the pleadings but must show by competent evidence the
existence of a genuine dispute of material fact requiring a trial. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(4); Schwab
v. Ames Const. 207 Ariz. at, 60, 83 P.3d at 60 (App. 2004); Kelly v. NationsBanc Mortgage
Corp.,199 Ariz. 284, 287, 17 P.3d 790, 793 (App. 2000).

In considering the motion, the Court must view all facts and reasonable inferences
flowing from those facts in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary
judgment is sought. Gipson v. Casey, 214 Ariz. 141, 142, 150 P.3d 228, 229 (2007); Meyers v.
City of Tempe, 212 Ariz. 128, 130, 148 P.3d 751, 753 (2006); Nat’l Bank of Ariz. V. Thruston,
218 Ariz. 112, 116, 180 P.3d 977, 981 (app. 2008). The motion should only be granted “if the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

08/10/2017

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

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 School v. Reeves, 166 Ariz. 301, 309,
802 P.2d 1000, 1008 (1990). In making this determination, the Arizona Supreme Court has
cautioned that “[s]ummary judgment should not be used as a substitute for jury trials, simply
because the trial judge may believe the moving party will probably win the jury’s verdict, nor
even when the trial judge believes the moving party should win the jury’s verdict.” Id. 166 Ariz.
at 210, 802 P.2d at 1009 (emphasis in original). However, a motion for summary judgment
should not be denied “simply on the speculation that some slight doubt…some scintilla of
evidence or some dispute over irrelevant or immaterial facts might blossom into a real
controversy in the midst of trial.” Id.

Therefore, considering all facts and reasonable inferences flowing from those facts in the
light most favorable to the Defendant/Counterclaimant, the court finds that there are no genuine
issues of material fact.

The Court finds that Summary Judgment is appropriate. The Association’s governing
documents provide for payment of assessments, late fees, costs of collection and attorneys’ fees
incurred in collecting assessments. There is no dispute that Defendant/Counterclaimant did not
pay all of the amounts that he owed to the Association, thus necessitating the filing of the
Association’s Complaint that has now been voluntarily dismissed as a result of the bankruptcy
proceedings. The Court further finds that Defendant/Counterclaimant has failed to produce or
disclose any evidence to support his counterclaims, and the evidence developed by the
Association directly refutes the counterclaims that Defendant/Counterclaimant has filed in this
Court.

Therefore,

As there are no issue of material fact, and the Association is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law.

IT IS ORDERED granting counterdefendant’s (the Association’s) Motion for Summary
Judgment as it pertains to Counterclaimant’s counterclaims.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the counsel for Counterdefendant (the Association)
submit a proposed judgment consistent with this ruling no later than September 5, 2017.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/22/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
A. Wood

Deputy

TERRAMAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
SAMUEL E ARROWSMITH

v.

DOUGLAS C RHOADS, et al.
DOUGLAS C RHOADS
7162 W BUCKSKIN TRL
PEORIA AZ 85383

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 108-NE

10:31 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Pretrial//Status Conference for the
purpose of setting this matter for trial. All parties appear telephonically. Appearing on behalf of
the Plaintiff(s) is counsel, Sam Arrowsmith. Defendant Douglas Rhoads is present on his own
behalf.

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

Court and counsel discuss the status of the case and scheduling matters.

IT IS ORDERED setting a 3-Day Jury Trial on October 16, 17, and 18, 2017. Trial
hours are as follows: from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., before:

THE HONORABLE JUDGE AIMEE L. ANDERSON
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

NORTHEAST REGIONAL COURT CENTER
18380 NORTH 40TH STREET
COURTROOM 108
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85032

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING.

Please note that normal trial days in this division are Monday through Thursday. First
day shall commence at 9:00 a.m., each day after will commence at 9:00 a.m. (unless otherwise
ordered). The lunch break will be taken at 12:00 p.m., with the afternoon session to begin
promptly at 1:30 p.m. A fifteen (15) minute break will be taken both mid-morning and mid-
afternoon, with the trial day to end at 4:30 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Final Pretrial Management Conference on
October 6, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. (1 hour allotted). The Pretrial Management Conference shall be
governed by the Pretrial Management Orders issued this date. Trial counsel and/or the parties
shall attend this conference in person.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all trial exhibits shall be submitted for marking not later
than September 29, 2017.

No information disclosed after the dates contained in the order may be used at the trial
absent court order on motion and affidavit.

The proceedings will take place in the Superior Court’s new “e-courtroom.” A record of
the proceedings will often, but not always, be made by FTR in lieu of a court reporter. If a court
reporter is required, the Court must receive a written request prior to the Trial Management
Conference set. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed
without a court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or
counsel may request a CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD is requested, please
obtain a form from the Self Center to request a daily copy of a court hearing or trial proceeding
being conducted and pay the applicable fee. Should an official transcript be required, you may
request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay for it.

If the parties are not familiar with the courtroom’s technology, they are encouraged to set
up an appointment with the court’s technology liaison at 602.372.7876.

10:37 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

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 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

PRETRIAL STATEMENT ORDERS

1. IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Pretrial Statement (JPTS) in accordance with Rule
16(d), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) is due in this division by 5:00 p.m., September
29, 2017.

2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Joint Pretrial Statement shall contain the
following:

(A) Stipulations of material fact and law;

(B) Such contested issues of fact and law as counsel can agree are material or applicable;

(C) A separate statement by each party of other issues of fact and law believed by that
party to be material;

(D) A list of witnesses intended to be used by each party during trial. Each party shall
list any objections to a witness and the basis for that objection. No witness shall be used at the
trial other than those listed, except for good cause shown. Witnesses whose testimony will be
received by deposition testimony only will be so indicated;

(E) Each party’s final list of exhibits to be used at trial for any purpose, including
impeachment. Plaintiffs shall deliver copies of all of their exhibits to all parties twenty days
before the final pretrial conference. All other parties shall deliver copies of all their exhibits to
all parties fifteen days before the final pretrial conference. Any exhibit that cannot be
reproduced must be made available for inspection to all parties on or before the deadlines stated
above. Each party shall list any objections to an exhibit and the basis for that objection. No
exhibit shall be used at the trial other than those listed, except for good cause shown. The parties
shall indicate any exhibits which the parties stipulate can be admitted into evidence, such
stipulations being subject to court approval;

(F) A statement by each party indicating any proposed deposition summaries or
designating portions of any deposition testimony to be offered by that party at trial, other than for
impeachment purposes. Deposition testimony shall be designated by transcript page and line
numbers. A copy of any proposed deposition summary and written transcript of designated
deposition testimony should be filed with the Joint Pretrial Statement. Each party shall list any
objections to the proposed deposition summaries and designated deposition testimony shall be
used at trial other than that designated or counter-designated or for impeachment purposes;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

(G) A brief statement of the case to be read to the jury during voir dire. If the parties
cannot agree on this statement, then each party shall submit a separate statement to the judge
who will decide the contents of the statement to be read to the jury;

(H) Technical equipment needed or interpreters requested;

(I) The number of jurors and alternates agreed upon, whether the alternates may
deliberate, and the number of jurors required to reach a verdict;

(J) Whether any party will invoke Rule 615 of the Arizona Rules of Evidence regarding
exclusion of witnesses from the courtroom; and

(K) A brief description of settlement efforts.

3.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED at the time of the filing of the joint pretrial
statement, the parties shall submit electronically (CD/Thumb drive), in word format, and a
sanitized copy of: (A) an agreed-upon set of jury instructions, proposed verdict forms, and voir
dire questions and (B) any additional jury instructions, verdict forms, and voir dire questions
requested, but not agreed upon, (C) a statement by each party on how a verbatim record of the
trial will be made (i.e., cd/videotape or court reporter).

4.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that at the time of filing the joint pretrial
statement, both parties shall submit a joint draft proposed final jury instructions, in Word, with
all case citations and RAJI references removed from the draft. In the event that the parties
disagree on a particular jury instruction, both parties’ proposed jury instruction shall be included
in the draft proposed jury instructions with the notation “Disputed” in the name of the
instruction.

5.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each party who will be submitting a trial
memorandum shall file such memorandum five days before the final pretrial conference, or if no
conference is scheduled, five days before the trial.

MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Pursuant to Rule 7.2(a) ARCP, counsel shall meet and confer to discuss and identify any
disputed evidentiary issues that are anticipated to be the subject of motions in limine. The parties
are directed to provide the court with a written report of agreements reached at the conference so
that the court can enforce such agreements. At the time of filing any motions in limine, counsel
shall also provide the court notice that counsel have met in person prior to the filing of said
motions in limine or the motion(s) may be stricken.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6

Motions in limine shall be filed only in accordance with Rule 7.2, ARCP. Motions in
limine shall be filed thirty (30) days before the PTMC and such motions must meet the test of
State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 397, 499 P.2d 152 (1972). No “prophylactic” motions in
limine may be filed. A written response to a motion in limine may be filed no later than ten (10)
days thereafter. The Court will rule on the motions in limine without oral argument. If the Court
wishes to hear argument, the argument will be heard at the PTMC. No replies shall be filed.

Unless prior written leave of Court is obtained for good cause shown, no party may
file more than three (3) motions in limine, including all subparts. The parties shall not file
motions denominated as “in limine” that are, in substance, late-filed motions for summary
judgment.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

All motions, other than motions in limine, shall be filed not later than ninety (90) days
prior to the date set for trial unless otherwise ordered by the court.

Notices of Settlement

In accordance with the provisions of ARCP 41(a), to be effective, any Notice of
Settlement or Dismissal providing for resolution of one or more pending claims that is filed
after service by the opposing party’s answer or dispositive motion, must be signed by each
affected party (or appropriate counsel) prosecuting or defending against the claim(s)
covered by the Notice. Each filed Notice shall state whether it resolves all pending issues in
the case and constitutes a representation to the Court that the claims subject to the Notice
have been fully resolved with respect to Notice signatories, and that the only further relief
to be sought with respect to such claims is entry of an order that each signatory confirms is
consistent with the agreement that gave rise to filing of the Notice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Time Estimates for Trial attached hereto shall be
submitted on the same date as the parties’ Joint Pretrial Statement as ordered herein.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7

ATTACHED: SAMPLE FORMAT FOR TIME ESTIMATE FORM AND EXHIBIT
PROCEDURES

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 8

CAUSE NUMBER

CASE CAPTION

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL

DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL
(NOTE: Add additional lines as needed for additional parties and or witnesses.)

TIME ESTIMATES FOR TRIAL

Opening Statement and Closing Argument

PLAINTIFF'S OPENING STATEMENT

DEFENDANT'S OPENING

PLAINTIFF'S CLOSING

DEFENDANT'S CLOSING

PLAINTIFF'S REBUTTAL

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

PLAINITIFF'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

Estimate of Time for Witness Examination

DEFENDANT'S
WITNESSES
DIRECT
EXAMINATION
CROSS
EXAMINATION
REDIRECT
EXAMINATION

The foregoing are based on the best estimates of counsel of the time reasonably needed to
complete the necessary examination of the witnesses listed.

____________________________________
Counsel for Plaintiff
___________________________________
Counsel for Defendant

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 9

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL WHEN PREPARING EXHIBITS FOR USE IN COURT

COUNSEL PLEASE READ

Exhibits are due to the Court not later than September 29, 2017.

If Defendant’s exhibits are received prior to Plaintiff’s exhibits, the Clerk may mark them
first with Plaintiff’s exhibits following.

Exhibits will be marked consecutively, Plaintiff’s exhibits are marked first and then
Defendant’s exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a
later date. To avoid confusion during trial, it is essential that counsel avoid submitting duplicate
exhibits. The clerk cannot reserve numbers for exhibits that will be provided at a later date. Do
not list “Any and all exhibits listed by ….” Depositions will not be marked as an exhibit.
Original depositions to be used for impeachment purposes shall be provided to the clerk on the
first day of trial/hearing to be hand-filed by the clerk.

*******If a party is submitting more than 100 exhibits, that party shall submit those
exhibits in three-ring, tabbed binders.********

****Each multiple page exhibit must be securely fastened together by staple or
other means. NO PAPER CLIPS, BINDER CLIPS, OR RUBBER BANDS may be used. If
Acco fasteners are used they must be long enough to fasten securely.****

Counsel are to provide a workable list of exhibits. The list should include a description
of each exhibit. (See blank sample of an exhibit table below as a reference.) Do not put numbers
on the exhibits; however a colored sheet of paper with the exhibit number on it should be
placed in front of each exhibit.

Exhibit Description Information:

The descriptions should be verifiable when viewing the first page of the exhibit.

Letter designations such as 5A, 5B, etc. shall not be used.

No bates stamp references or number of pages in documents should be used.

If counsel are submitting large charts, blow-ups or maps, please include a small version
which can be marked as the exhibit and can go into the jury if in evidence. The blow-ups, charts

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2015-055714

11/18/2016

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 10

and/or maps can be used as demonstrative but will not be marked as exhibits and will be returned
to counsel.

For additional assistance in preparation of exhibits contact the courtroom clerk at 602-
372-7732.

Sample of List of Exhibits to be provided to the courtroom clerk:

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit
No.
Identi-
fied By

Description
Stipulated in
Evidence/
Objection

Documents