Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2014-094169: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Troon North Association.

Case Number

CV2014-094169

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

7/16/2014

Case Type

Civil

Judge

McDowell, David

Location

Southeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/06/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

03/03/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received and reviewed Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment Regarding Plaintiff’s Foreclosure Count and Regarding Counter-Claim; and
Plaintiff/Counter Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; the Responses and
Replies thereto.

IT IS ORDERED setting an Oral Argument re: Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment Regarding Plaintiff’s Foreclosure Count and Regarding Counter-Claim;
and Plaintiff/Counter Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on April 3, 2015 at
1:30 p.m. (allotted time: 1 hour) before:

HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL
SOUTHEAST COURTHOUSE
222 EAST JAVELINA
COURTROOM 205
MESA AZ 85210

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

03/03/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:

If extended oral argument is necessary, counsel must so advise the Court no later than
four (4) court days prior to the date set for hearing so that oral argument can be rescheduled.

Any motion or stipulation for continuance must be filed with the Court no later than four
(4) court days prior to the date set for hearing. After that date, no continuances will be granted
except for extraordinary circumstances.

Counsel are advised that if the answering memorandum is not timely filed in accordance
with the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, oral argument may be vacated and the motion will be
ruled upon in accordance with Rule 7.1(b), A.R.C.P.

NOTE: All Court proceedings are recorded by audio method and not by a court
reporter. Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division
three (3) court business days before the schedule hearing.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/08/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/03/2015

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT

Courtroom – SEF 205

1:35 p.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment. Counsel, Charles Maxwell, Mark Waldron and Paul Neil, are present on behalf of the
Plaintiff who is not present. Counsel, Elijah Rosov, is present on behalf of the Defendants, et al.,
Michael Ripson, is present.

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

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT the Court is waiting on a Response being filed by
Defendants. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that counsel for Defendants shall file the Response to the Motion to
Strike by April 08, 2015.

Argument is heard regarding the Motion for Summary Judgment.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/03/2015

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

3:03 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/13/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
CHARLES E MAXWELL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court notes that more than 180 days have elapsed since the commencement of this
action. The parties are directed to Rules 16 and 38.1, Ariz. R. Civ. P., which were amended
effective April 15, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

The parties shall meet personally to discuss all of the matters set forth in Rule 16(b)
Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, and the parties shall file with the Court by 5:00 p.m. on May
8, 2015 a Joint Report and Proposed Scheduling Order for discovery, motion and disclosure
deadlines in the form attached hereto, which are substantially in the form set forth in Forms
11-13, Ariz. R. Civ. P. 84, Appendix of Forms. Counsel shall upload and e-file all proposed
orders in WORD format to allow for possible modification by the Court if needed.

The Court will review the Joint Report and Proposed Scheduling Order and may adopt or
modify the Proposed Scheduling Order, set a scheduling conference to resolve disputed items, or
resolve the disagreements without argument.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items that are to be included in the Order, the
reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in their Proposed Order.

Upon entry of the Scheduling Order, the Court will schedule a status conference as soon
as possible following the deadline for the completion of discovery for the purpose of assigning a
trial date. At the status conference, if the parties have completed discovery and are ready for
trial, the Court will set firm dates for the final pretrial management conference and for trial. If
the parties are not ready for trial, the matter may be placed on the Dismissal Calendar for
dismissal within sixty (60) days.

If the parties feel a status conference is necessary at this stage of the litigation, they
should address the reasons why in the first paragraph of the Proposed Scheduling Order.

If a Joint Report and Joint Proposed Scheduling Order are not timely submitted,
the Court will place the matter on the Dismissal Calendar for dismissal in sixty (60) days.

JOINT REPORT

The parties signing below certify that they have conferred about the matters set forth in
Rule 16(d), and that this case is not subject to the mandatory arbitration provisions of Rule 72.
With regard to matters upon which the parties could not agree, they have set forth their positions
separately in item 14 below. The parties are submitting a Proposed Scheduling Order with this
Joint Report. Each date in the Joint Report and in the Proposed Scheduling Order includes a
calendar month, day, and year.

1.Brief description of the case:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
● If a claimant is seeking other than monetary damages, specify the relief sought
_______________________________________________________________________.

2. Current case status: Every defendant has been served or dismissed. [ ] yes [ ] no
● Every party who has not been defaulted has filed a responsive pleading. [ ] yes [ ] no
● Explanation of a “no” response to either of the above statements:
_______________________________________________________________________.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3

3. Amendments: A party anticipates filing an amendment to a pleading that will add a new
party to the case: [ ] yes [ ] no

4. Special case management: Special case management procedures are appropriate:
[ ] yes [ ] no

If “yes,” the following case management procedures are appropriate because:
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________.

5. Settlement: The parties agree to engage in settlement discussions with [ ] a settlement judge
assigned by the court, or [ ] a private mediator. The parties will be ready for a settlement
conference or a private mediation by _______________________.
If the parties will not engage in a settlement conference or a private mediation, state the reason(s)
why: __________________________________________________________.

6. Readiness: This case will be ready for trial by _____________________________.

7. Jury: A trial by jury is demanded. [ ] yes [ ] no

8. Length of trial: The estimated length of trial is ______ days.

9. Summary jury: The parties agree to a summary jury trial. [ ] yes [ ] no

10. Preference: This case is entitled to a preference for trial pursuant to the following statute or
rule: __________________________________________________________.

11. Special requirements: [ ] At a pretrial conference and/or [ ] at trial, a party will require
[ ] disability accommodations (specify)
______________________________________________
[ ] an interpreter (specify language) ______________________________________________

12. Scheduling conference: The parties request a Rule 16(d) scheduling conference.
[ ] yes [ ] no
If requested, the reasons for having a conference are: ____________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________.

13. Other matters: Other matters that the parties wish to bring to the court’s attention that may
affect management of this case: ______________________________________

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 4

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________.

14. Items upon which the parties do not agree: The parties were unable in good faith to agree
upon the following items, and the position of each party as to each item is as follows:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________.

Dated this ____ day of __________, 20____.

_________________________________

______________________________
For Plaintiff

For Defendant

PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER
STANDARD CASE

Upon consideration of the parties' Joint Report, the court orders as follows:
1. Initial disclosure: The parties have exchanged their initial disclosure statements, or will
exchange them no later than ________________________.

2. Expert witness disclosure: The parties shall simultaneously disclose areas of expert testimony
by _________________. (Alternative: Plaintiff shall disclose areas of expert testimony by
_________________, and Defendant shall disclose areas of expert testimony by
_________________.)

The parties shall simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of experts by
______________. (Alternative: Plaintiff shall disclose the identity and opinions of experts by
_____________, and Defendant shall disclose the identity and opinions of experts by
_____________________.) The parties shall simultaneously disclose their rebuttal expert
opinions by _____________.

3. Lay (non-expert) witness disclosure: The parties shall disclose all lay witnesses by
____________________. (Alternative: The parties shall disclose lay witnesses in the following
order, and by the following dates___________________________________.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 5

4. Final supplemental disclosure: Each party shall provide final supplemental disclosure by
______________. This order does not replace the parties' obligation to seasonably disclose Rule
26.1 information on an on-going basis and as it becomes available.

No party shall use any lay witness, expert witness, expert opinion, or exhibit at trial not
disclosed in a timely manner, except upon order of the court for good cause shown or upon
a written or an on-the-record agreement of the parties.

5. Discovery deadlines: The parties will propound all discovery undertaken pursuant to Rules
33 through 36 by _________________. The parties will complete the depositions of parties and
lay witnesses by _____________________________________, and will complete the
depositions of expert witnesses by ______________________________. The parties will
complete all other discovery by _______________________. (“Complete discovery” includes
conclusion of all depositions and submission of full and final responses to written discovery.)

6. Settlement conference or private mediation: [choose one]:

[ ] Referral to ADR for a settlement conference: The clerk of the court will issue a referral
to ADR by a separate minute entry.

OR
[ ] Private mediation: The parties shall participate in mediation using a private mediator
agreed
to
by
the
parties.
The
parties
shall
complete
the
mediation
by
__________________________.

All attorneys and their clients, all self-represented parties, and any non-attorney representatives
who have full and complete authority to settle this case shall personally appear and participate in
good faith in this mediation, even if no settlement is expected. However, if a non-attorney
representative requests a telephonic appearance and the mediator grants the request prior to the
mediation date, a non-attorney representative may appear telephonically.

[ ] No settlement conference or mediation: A settlement conference or private mediation is
not ordered.

7. Dispositive motions: The parties shall file all dispositive motions by ______________.

8. Trial setting conference: On ______________________________ [the court will provide
this date], the court will conduct a telephonic trial setting conference. Attorneys and self-
represented parties shall have their trial calendars available for the conference. Counsel for

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/08/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 6

Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call by arranging for the presence of all other counsel and
self-represented parties, and by calling this division at 602-506-5514 promptly at the scheduled
time.

NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However, any
party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the Division three (3)
court business days before the scheduled hearing.

9. Firm dates: No stipulation of the parties that alters a filing deadline or a hearing date
contained in this scheduling order will be effective without an order of this court approving the
stipulation. Dates set forth in this order that govern court filings or hearings are FIRM dates, and
may be modified only with this court's consent and for good cause. This court ordinarily will not
consider a lack of preparation as good cause.

10. Further orders: The court further orders as follows:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________.

__________________________

____________________________________
DATE

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Filed ***

04/20/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/15/2015

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
CHARLES E MAXWELL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

UNDER ADVISEMENT RULING

The Court took this matter under advisement after Oral Argument was held on April 3,
2015 on Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Re: Plaintiff’s
Foreclosure Count and Re: Counterclaimant and Plaintiff/Counter Defendant’s Cross Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment. The Court has considered the arguments of the parties and the
pleadings. The Court makes the following findings and enters the following orders.

With respect to Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike,

THE COURT FINDS the Defendants have improperly cited a ruling from Superior Court
Judge Mark Aceto.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike. The Court will not consider any
of the references to Judge Aceto’s ruling in this case.

THE COURT FINDS that Defendant Ripson is the owner of the property at 28695 North
94th Place in Scottsdale, Arizona. The Court further finds that Ripson has become delinquent in
his payments for assessment fees and other late charges and costs. The Court further finds that

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/15/2015

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2

Defendant Ripson became delinquent in 2009 and remained delinquent each year thereafter
through 2014, at which time he paid off the delinquent assessment fees.

The Court will first consider Defendant’s special action under A.R.S. §33-420 in which
the Defendant attempted to find attorney Waldron and the Home Owners’ Association
responsible for failing to release the lis pendens lien which was filed.

The Court further finds that A.R.S. §33-420 is not applicable under the circumstances of
this case. The Court further finds that at the time the lis pendens was filed, the Defendant owed
$1,682.00. The Court further finds that Defendant admits that he owed that money to the Home
Owners’ Association at the time the lis pendens was put into effect. The Court further finds as a
matter of law, that A.R.S. §33-420 does not apply in these circumstances.

IT IS ORDERED dismissing Defendant’s special action and counterclaim under A.R.S.
§33-420 with prejudice.

Defendant contends that Plaintiff has no right for foreclosure under A.R.S. §33-1807(A)
because he, at some point in time, paid the Home Owners’ Association assessments. A.R.S. §33-
1807(A) reads as follows:

“The association lien for assessments, for charges for late payments of those
assessments, for reasonable collections of attorney’s fees and for reasonable attorney’s fees and
costs incurred with respect to those assessments may be foreclosed in the same manner as a
mortgage on real estate but may be foreclosed only if the owner has been delinquent in the
payment of money secured by the lien, excluding reasonable collection fees, attorney’s fees and
charges for late payments and costs incurred with respect to those assessments, for a period of
one year or for an amount of $1,200.00 or more, whichever occurs first.”

The Court further finds that at one point the Plaintiff was in arrearage in his assessment
fees for over a period of one year and over the amount of $1,200.00. The Court further finds that
on August 04, 2014, the Defendant paid his assessments in full. The Court interprets the phrase
“has been” delinquent to be a triggering mechanism under which the Home Owners’ Association
could foreclose on a delinquent homeowner. The Court does not interpret the “has been”
language to allow the delinquent homeowner to, at any point and time, pay the full assessment
fees to avoid the foreclosure provisions of A.R.S. §33-1807(A).

The Court interprets the “has been” language as similar to that of a jurisdiction question
that once the delinquent party has been in arrears for over a year or $1,200, whichever occurs
first, the statute applies at that point and time to the delinquent homeowner. The Court further

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/15/2015

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 3

finds that the Association’s lien did not end with the Defendant’s payment of his regular
assessment portion of the lien.

The Court finds under article 7 of the CC&R’s, specifically 7.02 and 7.04, that the Home
Owners’ Association has a right to place liens on parcels and to enforce them. The Court further
finds that they also have the right to assess special assessments. The Court further finds that
section 7.07 of the CC&Rs confirms the association’s contractual liens against delinquent
homeowners and their ability to collect late charges, interest and attorney’s fees and costs. The
Court further finds that the Planned Community Act does not pre-empt the Home Owners’
Association’s contractual liens and rights under their CC&R’s and their rights to foreclose
thereunder. The Court further finds that A.R.S. §33-1807(K) does contain language that shows
Arizona Legislature’s intent to pre-empt a contracted right or other statutory rights under the
Planned Community Act. The Court further finds that language is not found with respect to the
Home Owners’ Association’s right to foreclose under A.R.S. §33-1807(A). Therefore,

THE COURT FINDS the Home Owners’ Association has a separate right to foreclose
under its CC&R’s as well as under A.R.S. §33-1807(A).

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.

With respect to Plaintiff’s foreclosure account and regarding their counterclaim,

THE COURT FINDS that there are no genuine issues of material fact, and the Plaintiff
has the right to foreclose under both theories.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.

THE COURT FINDS that the Association lien did not end when the Defendant paid the
regular assessment fees, and that the Association may proceed pursuant to its lien and
foreclosure rights under both its CC&Rs and under A.R.S. §33-1807(A).

IT IS ORDERED allowing Plaintiff to collect its attorney’s fees and costs. Plaintiff shall
have 30 days from receipt of this minute entry to file a form of Judgment and a request for
attorney’s fees.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

04/15/2015

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 4

Dated this 15th day of April, 2015

/ s / HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL

HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/29/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

05/27/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
CHARLES E MAXWELL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Troon North
Association and Mark Waldron’s Request for Hearing to decide the remaining issues in this
lawsuit.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Request for Hearing.

The Court notes that a minute entry was issued on April 8, 2015 requiring the parties to
submit a Joint Report and proposed Scheduling Order, pursuant to Rule 16(b), Ariz. R. Civ. P.,
by May 8, 2015. That date has passed and the required pleadings have not been received.

This matter is on the Court’s Dismissal Calendar for dismissal on June 15, 2015, and will
be dismissed unless a Joint Report or proposed Scheduling Order are received, a form of final
judgment or a stipulation for dismissal (along with a proposed form of order) is submitted as to
all remaining parties and claims.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/10/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

06/05/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
CHARLES E MAXWELL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

ORDER SIGNED

The Court is in receipt of the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s
Application for Attorneys’ Fees filed by Plaintiff on May 15, 2015.

IT IS ORDERED granting the Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s
Application for Attorneys’ Fees to June 15, 2015, all in accordance with the formal written
Order signed by the Court on June 5, 2015, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on June 5, 2015.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/10/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

06/05/2015

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
CHARLES E MAXWELL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

ORDER SIGNED

The Court is in receipt of Defendant Ripson Holdings, LLC’s Motion to Extend Filing
Deadline for Response to Proposed Form of Judgment.

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s Motion to Extend Filing Deadline to June 15,
2015, all in accordance with the formal written Order signed by the Court on June 5, 2015, and
filed (entered) by the Clerk on June 5, 2015.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/25/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

06/22/2015

Docket Code 098
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
PAUL R NEIL

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

MARK W WALDRON
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
SAMUEL C RICHARDSON
DOCKET-CIVIL-SE

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Troon North Association and
Counterdefendant Mark W. Waldron’s Notice of Substitution of Counsel Within Firm, filed June
19, 2015, and good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Notice of Substitution of Counsel Within Firm, and
allowing Attorney Samuel C. Richardson from Maxwell & Morgan, P.C. to substitute as attorney
of record in place of Attorney Paul R. Neil as attorney of record for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant
Troon North Association and Counterdefendant Mark W. Waldron.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Filed ***

07/01/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

06/26/2015

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
SAMUEL C RICHARDSON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
ELIJAH W ROSOV

JUDGMENT SIGNED

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Application for Award of Attorney Fees and Statement
of Costs in connection with the Court’s under advisement ruling of April 15, 2015. The Court
has considered the Plaintiff’s Application and Affidavit, Defendant Ripson Holdings’ Response
to the Application, Defendant 4AAR Holdings’ Response/Objection to Plaintiff’s Application,
and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Reply. The Court has also considered the Plaintiff’s proposed
form of Judgment, Defendant Ripson Holdings’ Objection, Defendant 4AAR Holdings’
Response/ Objection, and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Reply. The Court has also considered
Defendant/Counterclaimant 4AAR Holdings’ Request to Establish Amount Subject to
Foreclosure and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Reply.

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant/Counterclaimant 4AAR Holdings’ Request to
Establish Amount Subject to Foreclosure Pursuant to A.R.S. 33-723 and 33-1807(A).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Application for Award of Attorney
Fees.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED entering Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against
Defendants, all in accordance with the formal written Judgment signed by the Court on June 24,
2015, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on June 26, 2015.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

06/26/2015

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing Defendant Ripson Holdings, LLC’s special
action and counterclaim against Plaintiff and against Counterdefendant Mark W. Waldron with
prejudice.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the judgment provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the judgment and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the judgment has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this judgment may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

No further matters remain in this case, therefore, this is a final Judgment entered pursuant
to Rule 54(c), Ariz.R.Civ.P.

Dated this 26TH day of June, 2015

/ s / HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL

HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Filed ***

08/13/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

08/12/2014

Docket Code 079
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

4 A A R HOLDINGS L L C
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
CITY OF SCOTTSDALE
C/O ERIC ANDERSON, ESQ.
3939 N. DRINKWATER BLVD.
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85251
ERIC C ANDERSON
DOCKET-CIVIL-SE

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s Notice of Dismissal of Defendant City of
Scottsdale, a municipality only electronically filed on August 8, 2014 in this case.

IT IS ORDERED dismissing any remaining unadjudicated claims as to City of
Scottsdale, a municipality only.

DATED this 12th day of August, 2014.

/ s / HON. MARK F. ACETO

JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/08/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

09/05/2014

Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. JOHN REA
L. Gilbert

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.

ERIC C ANDERSON
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-CCC
JUDGE ACETO
JUDGE UDALL

CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Mark F. Aceto. A Notice of Change
of Judge has been filed by Defendant City of Scottsdale. The case was transferred to the
Presiding Civil Judge for reassignment.

IT IS ORDERED that this case be assigned to Civil Calendar CVJ05, the Honorable
David Udall, for all further proceedings. If any objections to the Notice of Change of Judge are
filed, the noticed judge retains jurisdiction to hear and decide the objections. Any objections
must be filed and a copy delivered to the noticed judge within twenty days of the date of this
order.

Pending:
 N/A

ATTENTION: If there are any matters pending and/or previously scheduled events
(oral argument, hearings, conferences, trial, etc.), counsel are directed to immediately
contact the newly assigned division to determine whether the new division is able to
maintain the current schedule in this matter.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/12/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

09/11/2014

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.

JUDGE UDALL

MINUTE ENTRY

An error having been made,

IT IS ORDERED correcting the Court’s Minute Entry Order dated September 5, 2014
and entitled “Case Reassignment-Civil Presiding Judge, page 1, paragraph 1, to read as follows:

This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Mark F. Aceto. A Notice of Change
of Judge has been filed by Plaintiff Troon North Association … .

The remainder of the Minute Entry is unchanged.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/15/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

12/10/2014

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero

Deputy

TROON NORTH ASSOCIATION
MARK W WALDRON

v.

RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C, et al.
RIPSON HOLDINGS L L C
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

4 A A R HOLDINGS L L C
C/O MICHAEL RIPSON
11424 E SAND HILLS
SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255

MINUTE ENTRY

This division has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application/Affidavit for Default Judgment
against Defendant(s) 4AAR Holdings, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company 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
Margaret Benny.

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

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-094169

12/10/2014

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

Pursuant to Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117, default judgment
packets are not permitted to be e-filed. Accordingly, parties are directed to hand-deliver a
default coversheet and copies of the necessary filed documents to the Commissioner’s division
for the entry of a default judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, no further action will be taken by the assigned
Commissioner until the necessary filed documents and coversheet are delivered to the division.

The parties/counsel can find the default judgment coversheet on the Court’s website at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/forms.asp

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

Documents