01/29/2016 — CV2015091936 ASSOCIATION, SANTARRA COMMUNITY 01/29/2016 HON. DAVID K. UDALL View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/03/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero
Deputy
SUNSET VISTA HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
BEN J HIMMELSTEIN
v.
SANTARRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
HOYT SHAY NEAL
STEVEN J HULSMAN
MARIA R KUPILLAS
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received Defendant Sunset Vista Homeowners’ Association’s
Controverting Certificate of Arbitration in this case, filed November 30, 2015. No objection has
been filed.
The Court has reviewed the Complaint, Defendant Sunset Vista Homeowners’
Association’s Answer and Controverting Certificate, Defendant Santarra Community
Association’s Answer and Counterclaim and Controverting Certificate, and the Court’s minute
entry ruling of September 4, 2015, which found that this case is subject to compulsory
arbitration.
After review,
THE COURT FINDS this case is no longer subject to compulsory arbitration.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED vacating the Court’s minute entry order of September 4, 2015, and
overruling Defendant Sunset Vista Homeowners’ Association’s Controverting Certificate and
removing this case from Arbitration.
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
February 29, 2016 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.
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 or extend the matter on the Dismissal Calendar for dismissal in sixty
(60) days.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3
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:
_____________________________________________________________________________.
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:
_____________________________________________________________________________.
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 4
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: _______________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________.
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
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 5
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________________________________________________ .)
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]:
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 6
[ ] 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
Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling this Division at 602-506-
5514, with all participating counsel and self-represented parties on the line, 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:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
01/29/2016
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 7
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________.
This case is removed from the Dismissal Calendar and all requirements of Rule 38.1 of
Ariz. R. Civ. P. are waived unless and until otherwise ordered by the Court.
__________________________
____________________________________
DATE
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
02/05/2016 — CV2015091936 ASSOCIATION, SANTARRA COMMUNITY 02/05/2016 HON. DAVID K. UDALL View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/10/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
02/05/2016
Docket Code 375
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero
Deputy
SUNSET VISTA HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
BEN J HIMMELSTEIN
v.
SANTARRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
HOYT SHAY NEAL
MARIA R KUPILLAS
DISMISSAL CALENDAR
A Notice of Settlement has been received.
IT IS ORDERED placing this case on the Court’s Dismissal calendar for dismissal,
without further notice, on April 5, 2016. Unless a stipulated judgment or a stipulation for
dismissal, along with a proposed form of order, is submitted prior to that date, or the Court
otherwise extends the deadline for good cause shown, all remaining claims and parties will be
dismissed.
05/06/2016 — CV2015091936 ASSOCIATION, SANTARRA COMMUNITY 05/06/2016 HON. DAVID K. UDALL View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Filed ***
05/11/2016 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
05/06/2016
Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
K. Tiero
Deputy
SUNSET VISTA HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
BEN J HIMMELSTEIN
v.
SANTARRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
HOYT SHAY NEAL
MARIA R KUPILLAS
CASE DISMISSED
Pursuant to the minute entry dated February 5, 2016, and nothing further having been
filed,
IT IS ORDERED dismissing this matter without prejudice, as to all parties and claims.
Dated this 6th day of May, 2016
/ s / HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL
HONORABLE DAVID K. UDALL
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
09/04/2015 — CV2015091936 ASSOCIATION, SANTARRA COMMUNITY 09/04/2015 HON. DAVID K. UDALL View Minute Entry ↑ top
- Source
- Minute Source
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/15/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2015-091936
09/04/2015
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. DAVID K. UDALL
I. Ostrander
Deputy
SUNSET VISTA HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
CHAD PHILIP MIESEN
v.
SANTARRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
SHANNON E CARLSON
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received and considered Defendant Santarra Community Association’s
(controverting) Certificate RE: Compulsory Arbitration which certifies that this case is not
subject to compulsory arbitration. The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s Certificate Regarding
Compulsory Arbitration, the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and Defendant Santarra Community
Association’s Answer. After review,
THE COURT FINDS this case IS subject to compulsory arbitration, as provided by
Rules 72 through 76 of the Ariz. R. Civ. Proc. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED overruling Defendant Santarra Community Association’s
(controverting) Certificate RE: Compulsory Arbitration and affirming the Plaintiff’s Certificate
Regarding Compulsory Arbitration which certifies that this case is subject to arbitration.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel and/or the parties shall direct all future
pleadings, except motions listed under Arizona Rules of Civil P. 74(c) (1), to the arbitrator for
consideration and ruling.
