HOA Default Judgment | CV2024-017272
The court entered default judgment for Val Vista Lakes after findings on service and attorney fees/costs.
Last updated July 2, 2026. Case: The Val Vista Lakes Community Association v. Peter J. Cahill, Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2024-017272.
Scope note: This page covers The Val Vista Lakes Community Association v. Peter J. Cahill (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2024-017272) as a public Arizona superior-court HOA case guide. It is built from three collected minute entries ending with the July 31, 2025 default-judgment minute entry. Currency caveat: the formal written Default Judgment, amount, collection history, satisfaction, and any appeal are not included in the collected minute entries. Superior-court rulings bind only the parties and are not precedent. This page is educational and is not legal advice.
The takeaway
The court entered default judgment for the association after finding proper service, entitlement to judgment by default, and reasonable attorney fees and costs. The collected entries do not state the judgment amount or provide contested legal analysis.
Case Participants
Neutral Parties
- The Val Vista Lakes Community Association (Plaintiff)
Association that obtained the default judgment. - Peter J. Cahill (Defendant)
Defendant against whom default judgment was entered. - Charles B. Sellers (Counsel)
Counsel listed for the association in the minute entries. - Garren Robert Laymon (Counsel)
Appeared for the association at the default hearings. - Hon. Jason Easterday (Judge)
Commissioner who held the default hearings and entered judgment. - Hon. Susanna C. Pineda (Judge)
Judge listed on the default-referral entry.
What happened
Val Vista Lakes filed an action against Peter J. Cahill. The collected record does not include the complaint or account records, so this page does not infer the amount owed or the full basis of the claim.
In March 2025, the assigned division received the association’s application and declaration for default and referred default proceedings to Commissioner Brian Palmer.
At a virtual default hearing on May 29, 2025, counsel appeared for the association and no one else appeared. The court granted a motion, continued the case on the dismissal calendar, and continued the default hearing to July 31, 2025.
At the continued default hearing, counsel again appeared for the association and no one else appeared. The court found the defendant was properly served, found the association entitled to default judgment, and found the requested attorney fees and costs reasonable and appropriate.
The court entered judgment for the association under the formal written Default Judgment signed and filed on July 31, 2025.
Video overview of the ruling
An AI-generated video overview of Val Vista Lakes Community Association v. Cahill (CV2024-017272 (Maricopa County Superior Court)). Val Vista Lakes obtained default judgment after findings on service and reasonable fees and costs. This plain-language summary was generated from the court’s filings; the court’s own ruling controls.
Listen: audio deep dive on the ruling
An AI-generated audio deep dive walking through the court’s reasoning and disposition in Val Vista Lakes Community Association v. Cahill. Generated from the case filings; verify against the linked ruling below.
Procedural timeline
Complete uploaded source-document index
This index is generated from every public-facing source file currently present in assets/court_case_downloads/val-vista-lakes-community-association-v-cahill/raw/: 3 PDFs. Files are ordered by the date/sequence embedded in the normalized filename; AI-generated review materials are labeled separately and should not be treated as court filings.
Default Judgment
Type: Decision or judgment
Shows the filer trying to move the case forward because the opposing party had not timely appeared.
Default Judgment
Type: Decision or judgment
Shows the filer trying to move the case forward because the opposing party had not timely appeared.
Default Judgment
Type: Decision or judgment
Default-judgment minute entry finding proper service, entitlement to judgment by default, reasonable attorney fees and costs, and entering judgment for Val Vista Lakes Community Association.
FAQ
What did the court decide at the final default hearing?
The court found proper service, found Val Vista Lakes entitled to judgment by default, found the requested attorney fees and costs reasonable and appropriate, and entered judgment for the association.
Does the collected record state the judgment amount?
No. The minute entries do not state the amount of the judgment.
Was the defendant present at the default hearings?
No. The collected entries state that no one else appeared at the May 29 and July 31, 2025 hearings.
Did the court interpret the CC&Rs or statutes?
No. The entries do not analyze governing documents or statutes.
Is this case precedential?
No. It is a superior-court default judgment entry and is not precedent.
Why is this case classified as standard?
It documents a default judgment outcome but does not include substantive HOA-law analysis.
Case Dossier
This generated dossier mirrors the structured data surfaced on the OAH/ADRE case pages. It is added from the curated court-case record and the custom page source package, while the hand-authored analysis below remains intact.
Case Summary
| Case ID / citation | CV2024-017272 (Maricopa County Superior Court) |
|---|---|
| Court / tribunal | Superior Court |
| Decision / key date | July 31, 2025 |
| Judge / panel | Hon. Jason Easterday, Hon. Susanna C. Pineda |
| Parties | The Val Vista Lakes Community Association (Plaintiff) v. Peter J. Cahill (Defendant) |
| Topics | assessmentsattorneys-feesprocedure |
| Outcome / holding | The court entered judgment in favor of Val Vista Lakes Community Association under a formal written Default Judgment signed and filed on July 31, 2025. |
| Primary public source | View source opinion/order |
Parties, Court, and Research Coverage
| Uploaded source package | 3 PDFs |
|---|---|
| Step-by-step docket roadmap | 3 roadmap entries |
| Video overview | Val Vista Lakes Community Association v. Cahill |
| Study / briefing material | 1 section |
| FAQ / homeowner questions | 6 questions |
| Curated download aliases | 1 download link |
Key Issues & Findings
After a continued default hearing, the superior court found Peter J. Cahill had been properly served, found Val Vista Lakes Community Association entitled to judgment by default, found the requested attorney fees and costs reasonable, and entered formal default judgment.
The collected record first shows the association filing default paperwork, which was referred to the commissioner handling default proceedings. At the first virtual default hearing, counsel appeared for the association, no one else appeared, and the court continued the hearing while extending the dismissal calendar.
At the continued default hearing, counsel again appeared for the association and no one else appeared. The court found that Peter J. Cahill was properly served, that the association was entitled to judgment by default, and that the requested attorney fees and costs were reasonable and appropriate. The court then entered judgment for the association under the formal written Default Judgment.
This case is useful as a record of an HOA default judgment that expressly includes findings on service, entitlement to default judgment, and reasonableness of attorney fees and costs. It does not provide contested legal analysis or state the amount of the judgment in the collected minutes.