FDCPA / Judgment Renewal Allegations
Reed is a settlement record, not a liability finding. The complaint alleged time-barred HOA judgment-collection conduct by CHDB Law LLP and Charlene Cruz; defendants denied wrongdoing, asserted defenses, and the case settled.
Federal court | D. Ariz. No. 2:25-cv-04355-MTL | Settlement notice filed 2026-05-14
Current-status note: This page is published as a litigation record based on the source files available through 2026-05-14. Later filings, appeals, mandates, settlements, or dismissal orders may change the posture; the linked court records control.
Allegations, settlements, procedural dismissals, and notices are not findings of liability unless a cited court order expressly makes that finding.
Scope note: This page summarizes a federal settlement record and distinguishes allegations from court findings. The downloaded record does not show a merits ruling that CHDB or any defendant violated the FDCPA. This page is educational and is not legal advice.
The takeaway
Reed is allegation-only public-interest evidence: the complaint accused CHDB Law LLP and Charlene Cruz of time-barred HOA judgment-collection conduct, defendants denied liability, and the downloaded record shows settlement without a merits finding.
Public-interest record: serious allegations, no adjudicated wrongdoing
The complaint alleged FDCPA and related violations tied to judgment-renewal, recording, and collection activity Reed characterized as time-barred.
CHDB and Cruz denied liability and asserted affirmative defenses. That denial must appear beside the allegations in any fair public summary.
The downloaded record contains a settlement notice. It does not contain a court finding that CHDB or Cruz did anything unlawful.
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
- Sara M. Reed (Plaintiff)
Filed the FDCPA/judgment-renewal complaint.
Respondent Side
- CHDB Law LLP (Defendant)
Formerly Carpenter, Hazlewood, Delgado & Bolen, LLP; denied liability in the answer. - Charlene Cruz (Defendant)
CHDB partner named in the complaint; denied liability in the answer. - John Doe Cruz / Paul Colin Rambeau (Defendant spouse / marital community allegation)
The answer identified Paul Colin Rambeau as Charlene Cruz’s spouse and denied marital-community liability. - Does I-X (Unidentified defendants)
Placeholder defendants named in the complaint.
Neutral Parties
- Michael T. Liburdi (Judge)
U.S. District Judge for the District of Arizona.
What happened
Sara M. Reed alleged that CHDB Law LLP and Charlene Cruz pursued or preserved an HOA-related judgment that Reed characterized as no longer enforceable. The complaint framed the dispute around FDCPA collection conduct, abuse of process, and wrongful-recording theories.
The defendants answered by denying liability. Their answer asserted, among other defenses, bona fide error and a disputed judgment-expiration theory tied to when the ten-year enforcement period began.
The downloaded record then shows a notice of settlement. The fair public conclusion is narrow: Reed documents negative allegations and a settlement, not judicial exoneration and not judicial liability.
Video overview of the case record
AI-generated video overview of Reed v. CHDB Law LLP et al.. This is an allegation-and-settlement record. Defendants denied liability, and no merits ruling appears in the downloaded record.
The written case page and linked court records are the controlling source for legal posture and accuracy.
Listen: audio deep dive on the case record
AI-generated audio deep dive for Reed v. CHDB Law LLP et al.. This is an allegation-and-settlement record. Defendants denied liability, and no merits ruling appears in the downloaded record.
Use the linked court records and written page for the exact legal posture.
Litigation record
Federal complaint filed alleging FDCPA and related claims over alleged time-barred HOA judgment collection.
Filed by: Reed
This is the source for the negative allegations; it is not a court finding.
Answer filed denying liability and asserting defenses.
Filed by: CHDB
Shows the defense posture that must be included for fair, non-defamatory framing.
Notice of settlement filed.
Filed by: Parties
Confirms settlement rather than a merits ruling in the downloaded record.
Complete uploaded source-document index
This index is generated from every public-facing source file currently present in assets/court_case_downloads/reed-v-chdb-law-llp-et-al/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.
Federal Complaint Fdcpa Judgment Renewal Allegations
Type: Decision or judgment
Complaint alleging FDCPA and related claims based on alleged time-barred HOA judgment-renewal and collection activity.
Answer Denying Liability
Type: Responsive pleading
CHDB answer denying liability and asserting affirmative defenses.
Notice Of Settlement
Type: Procedural/service filing
Notice stating the parties reached settlement; no merits ruling appears in the downloaded record.
FAQ
Did the court find CHDB liable in Reed?
No. The downloaded record shows allegations, an answer denying liability, and settlement. It does not show a merits ruling finding CHDB liable.
Why publish a settled allegation case?
Because the complaint and answer are public federal records involving HOA collection counsel. The page is useful only if it keeps allegations, denials, and settlement posture clear.
Can this page say CHDB acted unlawfully?
No. It can say Reed alleged unlawful conduct and CHDB denied it. It cannot present those allegations as proven.
What should homeowners learn from it?
Judgment-renewal and stale-collection issues can become FDCPA disputes, but the enforceability and liability questions depend on specific facts and court rulings.
Primary sources
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 | D. Ariz. No. 2:25-cv-04355-MTL |
|---|---|
| Court / tribunal | Federal Court |
| Decision / key date | July 7, 2026 |
| Judge / panel | Michael T. Liburdi |
| Parties | Sara M. Reed (plaintiff) v. CHDB Law LLP, Charlene Cruz and John Doe Cruz, and Does I-X. |
| Governing law |
|
| Topics | FDCPAAssessmentsAttorney FeesProcedure |
| Outcome / holding | No merits holding appears in the downloaded record. The case settled after defendants denied liability, so the public record supports allegation-and-settlement framing only. |
| 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 | Reed v. CHDB Law LLP et al. – D. Ariz. No. 2:25-cv-04355-MTL |
| Study / briefing material | 1 section |
| FAQ / homeowner questions | 4 questions |
| Curated download aliases | 3 download links |
Key Issues & Findings
Sara M. Reed sued CHDB Law LLP and Charlene Cruz in the District of Arizona. The complaint alleged FDCPA and related claims based on alleged judgment-renewal, recording, and collection activity that Reed characterized as time-barred. CHDB and Cruz answered and denied liability, asserting defenses including bona fide error and a disputed judgment-expiration theory. The downloaded record shows a notice of settlement, but does not include a dismissal order or merits ruling. Reed should therefore be treated as an allegation-and-settlement record, not proof that a court found wrongdoing.
The complaint framed the dispute as FDCPA, abuse-of-process, and wrongful-recording claims arising from an allegedly untimely judgment-renewal affidavit. The answer denied liability and asserted affirmative defenses, including a disputed calculation of the judgment-renewal deadline. The notice of settlement states that the parties resolved the matter. Without a dismissal order, judgment, or merits findings in the source set, the fair conclusion is narrow: the allegations are serious public-interest allegations, but they were not adjudicated in the downloaded record.
Reed is useful for understanding the kinds of time-barred-collection and judgment-renewal allegations homeowners may raise against HOA collection counsel. It should not be used as proof of corruption or liability. Any public summary must put the complaint allegations beside the defendants’ denial, the bona-fide-error defense, and the settlement/no-merits posture.