06/15/2017 — CV2016014907 AT TIBURON CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC, THE TERRACES 06/15/2017 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
06/16/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
06/15/2017
Docket Code 901
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
D Arrieta
Deputy
THE TERRACES AT TIBURON
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC
LAUREN A VIE
v.
MARIA A DE SANNA, et al.
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
DOCKET-CIVIL-CCC
JUDGMENT
Pending in this matter is Plaintiff's Application for Attorney's Fees and Costs that was
filed on behalf of plaintiff The Terraces at Tiburon Condominium Association, Inc.
By no reasonable standard is the amount of attorney's fees that the Application would
have the court award anything other than disproportionate to the effort that was needed to obtain
the result that was achieved. See e.g., Response to Application for Attorneys' Fees (5/30/17) at
2-31; see also Baum v. Baum, 120 Ariz. 140, 146, 584 P.2d 604, 610 (App. 1978) (affirming trial
court’s award of attorney’s fees: when “determining what is a reasonable fee, the trial judge can
draw upon his knowledge of the case and upon his own experience”). The award of costs that
the Application requests is unsupported with any receipts or other evidence documenting the
expenses said to be incurred (and at least some of them may not be recovered even if supporting
1 Plaintiff's reply (at 2 & n.1) urges incorrectly that the objections to the requested fees are not stated with sufficient
specificity.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
06/15/2017
Docket Code 901
Form V000A
Page 2
documentation exists2). Accordingly, with respect to taxable costs, the court will take judicial
notice of the initial filing fee, but nothing more.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Judgment is awarded in favor of plaintiff The Terrace at Tiburon Condominium
Association, Inc. and against defendant Maria A. De Sanna in the amount of $5,535.90
($5,175.00 as reasonable attorney's fees and $360.90 as taxable costs).
2. Interest will accrue on the unpaid amount of the judgment at the legal rate of five
percent annually (not compounded) beginning on the date that this judgment is entered.
3. No matters remain pending in this case. This is a final judgment under Ariz. R. Civ.
P. 54(c).
Date: June 15, 2017
/ s / HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
2 For example, service of process fees may not be recovered absent a showing that a defendant refused a request to
waive service of the summons. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 4.1(c)(1(D)), 2). That showing does not accompany plaintiff's
statement of costs.
08/21/2017 — CV2016014907 AT TIBURON CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC, THE TERRACES 08/21/2017 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/24/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
08/21/2017
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
D Arrieta
Deputy
THE TERRACES AT TIBURON
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC
LAUREN A VIE
v.
MARIA A DE SANNA, et al.
JONATHAN A DESSAULES
MINUTE ENTRY
A motion for reconsideration regarding the decision to deny an award of taxable costs
was filed on behalf of plaintiff The Terraces at Tiburon Condominium Ass'n, Inc. That denial
was prompted because The Terraces' application for costs was unaccompanied by any supporting
billing statements, invoices, and the like showing that the requested costs had been incurred.
[See Judgment (6/15/17) at 1-2] The motion does not maintain that, given the absence of
supporting records, the denial was in error. As such, the motion is not a motion that asks the
court to reconsider what it was presented. Instead, the motion presents records (i.e., 10 exhibits)
that the court is asked to consider for the first time.
Allowing motions for reconsideration to be treated as opportunities for what amount to
"do-overs" promotes inefficiency while increasing the expense of the litigation, which is contrary
to what Ariz. R. Civ. P. 1 is intended to accomplish. Thus, motions for reconsideration are not a
means by which a party is permitted to submit evidence that could have been offered previously.
See e.g., Carroll v. Nakatani, 342 F.3d 934, 945 (9th Cir. 2003) (a motion for reconsideration
“may not be used to raise arguments or present evidence for the first time when they could
reasonably have been raised earlier in the litigation”); Frederick S. Wyle P.C. v. Texaco, Inc.,
764 F.2d 604, 609, (9th Cir. 1985) (denial of reconsideration is warranted when the motion relies
on evidence that could have been offered before the court’s ruling); see also Cella Barr Assocs.,
Inc. v. Cohen, 177 Ariz. 480, 487 n.1, 868 P.2d 1063, 1070 n.1 (App. 1994) (on appeal, evidence
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
08/21/2017
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
submitted to the trial court with a motion for reconsideration is not considered); Brookover v.
Roberts Enters., Inc., 215 Ariz. 52, 57 n.2, ¶17, 156 P.3d 1157, 1162 n.2 (App. 2007) (same).
The dates on each the exhibits accompanying the motion establish that all of them could
have been submitted with the application, and the motion does not attempt to excuse that failure.
IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Court's
06/15/2017 Minute Entry that was submitted on behalf of The Terraces at Tiburon Condominium
Ass'n, Inc.
12/05/2016 — CV2016014907 AT TIBURON CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC, THE TERRACES 12/05/2016 HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/06/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
12/05/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DOUGLAS GERLACH
D Arrieta
Deputy
THE TERRACES AT TIBURON
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC
LAUREN A VIE
v.
MARIA A DE SANNA, et al.
MARIA A DE SANNA
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
DIANA L VARELA
COMM. BARTH
MINUTE ENTRY
This division has received Plaintiff’s e-filed Application for Default and Entry of Default
as to Maria A. De Sanna Only, filed on December 1, 2016, 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
Barth.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a
default judgment must be e-filed.
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.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2016-014907
12/05/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
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/howDoI.asp
