Administrative Review | A.R.S. § 12-901 & § 12-905 | LC2016-000282
When homeowner Carol Root obtained an order granting a rehearing in her CC&R; dispute, Candlewood Estates at Troon North HOA rushed to Superior Court to stop it. Judge Patricia Ann Starr dismissed the HOA’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, awarding costs to the homeowner.
Last updated September 17, 2026. Case: Candlewood Estates at Troon North Homeowners Association v. Carol M. Root and Arizona Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety, Maricopa County Superior Court No. LC2016-000282 (minute entries use LC2016-000282-001 DT); related Office of Administrative Hearings / DFBLS matter; Hon. Patricia Ann Starr.
Scope note: This page covers Maricopa County Superior Court No. LC2016-000282, an administrative appeal filed on July 1, 2016—the very month the Arizona Legislature transferred HOA dispute oversight from DFBLS to the Arizona Department of Real Estate (ADRE). Candlewood Estates at Troon North HOA appealed an administrative order granting homeowner Carol M. Root a rehearing, attempting to enforce CC&R; alternative dispute resolution clauses. Superior Court Judge Patricia Ann Starr dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 12-901(2) and § 12-905(A), holding that granting an administrative rehearing is not a final appealable order. This page is educational and is not legal advice.
The takeaway
The Superior Court dismissed the HOA’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 12-905(A). An administrative order granting a petition for rehearing is not a final administrative decision appealable to Superior Court under A.R.S. § 12-901(2), even if the agency form text states the order is appealable.
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
- Candlewood Estates at Troon North Homeowners Association (Plaintiff/Appellant)
Homeowners association in the Troon North master planned community in Scottsdale that brought the premature appeal. - Frederick E. Davidson (Counsel)
Law Offices of Frederick E. Davidson
Counsel of record representing Candlewood Estates at Troon North Homeowners Association.
Respondent Side
- Carol M. Root (Defendant/Appellee)
Homeowner who petitioned against CC&R violations, secured an administrative rehearing, and won dismissal of the HOA's appeal with costs; appeared pro per. - Arizona Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety (Agency/Appellee)
State department that granted Root's petition for rehearing; counsel for the successor Arizona Department of Real Estate also appeared. - Bradley R. Jardine (Counsel)
Office of Administrative Hearings / DFBLS
Counsel appearing in connection with the administrative record transmittal.
Neutral Parties
- Hon. Patricia Ann Starr (Judge)
Maricopa County Superior Court
Superior Court judge who dismissed the appeal for lack of administrative finality and awarded costs to Root.
What happened
Carol M. Root filed a petition against Candlewood Estates at Troon North HOA with DFBLS alleging CC&R; violations.
The HOA moved to dismiss, claiming CC&R; dispute resolution provisions were the exclusive remedy, which an ALJ initially granted.
On May 25, 2016, DFBLS granted Root’s motion for rehearing, finding the ALJ’s dismissal contrary to law.
On July 1, 2016, Candlewood Estates appealed to Maricopa County Superior Court (LC2016-000282) seeking to overturn the rehearing order.
Judge Patricia Ann Starr granted a temporary stay pending review, but ultimately dismissed the entire appeal on October 18, 2017 for lack of jurisdiction, ruling that granting a rehearing is not a final agency decision.
On March 8, 2018, Judge Starr signed an order awarding taxable costs to homeowner Carol Root.
Procedural timeline
ALJ grants Candlewood Estates' motion to dismiss based on CC&R dispute clauses.
DFBLS enters order granting homeowner Carol Root's petition for rehearing as contrary to law.
Candlewood Estates files Notice of Appeal for Judicial Review in Maricopa County Superior Court (LC2016-000282).
Superior Court enters order granting temporary stay of administrative proceedings pending appeal.
Superior Court notes completion of briefing on the administrative record.
Judge Patricia Ann Starr issues minute entry dismissing the appeal for lack of a final administrative decision.
Judge Starr enters formal order awarding taxable costs to homeowner Carol Root.
Complete source-document index
This index contains 12 PDFs from the reviewed public source packet. Byte-identical copies are listed once. Files are ordered by the date and sequence in the public filename, and party filings or research materials are labeled separately from court rulings.
Initial Minute Entry Re Expedited Stay
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Administrative Review Orders
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Order Setting Stay Briefing Schedule
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Order Granting Stay Pending Appeal
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Order Re Administrative Transcript
Type: Court order/minute entry
Adds hearing transcript material to the record for later review or appeal.
Minute Entry Re Transcript Filing
Type: Court order/minute entry
Adds hearing transcript material to the record for later review or appeal.
Order Granting Extension For Response Brief
Type: Court order/minute entry
Opposing or responsive paper; compare it to the motion or request filed immediately before it.
Nunc Pro Tunc Endorsement Correction
Type: Court/source PDF
Uploaded source file in the case record; read it in sequence with the surrounding filings to follow the procedure.
Order Denying Initial Motion To Dismiss
Type: Court order/minute entry
A request for a specific ruling or procedural action; the next document is often a response or order.
Order Setting Appeal At Issue
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Record Appeal Ruling Dismissing Appeal For Lack Of Finality
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Order Awarding Costs To Appellee Root
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
FAQ
What was the dispute in LC2016-000282?
Homeowner Carol M. Root filed an administrative petition with the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety (DFBLS) alleging that Candlewood Estates at Troon North Homeowners Association violated the community’s CC&Rs.; The HOA moved to dismiss, arguing the CC&Rs; required disputes to go through internal alternative dispute resolution. An Administrative Law Judge initially dismissed the petition, but DFBLS granted Root’s petition for rehearing.
Why did the HOA appeal to Superior Court?
Candlewood Estates sought to overturn the DFBLS order granting the rehearing, arguing that the agency had labeled its rehearing order a ‘final administrative decision’ and that the ALJ’s initial dismissal was correct under the CC&Rs.;
Why did Judge Starr dismiss the HOA's appeal?
Judge Patricia Ann Starr held that under A.R.S. §§ 12-901(2) and 12-905(A), the Superior Court has jurisdiction to review only final administrative decisions that terminate proceedings before the agency. Even though the agency order contained standard boiler-plate text calling it a ‘final administrative decision,’ granting a rehearing continues the proceedings rather than terminating them. The appeal was therefore an impermissible interlocutory appeal.
Can CC&R dispute clauses strip state administrative tribunals of jurisdiction?
The ALJ’s initial dismissal had accepted the HOA’s argument that CC&R; dispute resolution procedures were exclusive. However, DFBLS granted a rehearing because that ruling was contrary to law—private CC&R; clauses cannot contract away a homeowner’s statutory right to file a dispute petition under Arizona law.
What costs were awarded to the homeowner?
Following the dismissal of the HOA’s appeal, self-represented homeowner Carol Root filed a Motion for Costs. On March 8, 2018, the Superior Court entered an order awarding Root her taxable costs incurred in defending against the HOA’s premature appeal.
Case Dossier
This dossier combines the case metadata, linked court sources, and the explanatory sections below. It distinguishes court rulings from party filings, allegations, and requested relief.
Case Summary
| Case ID / citation | Maricopa County Superior Court No. LC2016-000282 |
|---|---|
| Court / tribunal | Superior Court |
| Decision / key date | October 18, 2017 |
| Judge / panel | Hon. Patricia Ann Starr |
| Parties | Candlewood Estates at Troon North HOA (Appellant) v. Carol M. Root and Arizona DFBLS (Appellees) |
| Governing law |
|
| Topics | ProcedureCC&RsAttorney Fees |
| Outcome / holding | The Superior Court dismissed the HOA's appeal for lack of jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 12-905(A). An administrative order granting a petition for rehearing is not a final administrative decision appealable to Superior Court under A.R.S. § 12-901(2), even if the agency form text states the order is appealable. |
| Primary public source | View hosted source opinion/order |
Parties, Court, and Research Coverage
| Reviewed source package | 12 PDFs |
|---|---|
| Step-by-step docket roadmap | 7 roadmap entries |
| Video overview | No video embed currently configured |
| Study / briefing material | 1 section |
| FAQ / homeowner questions | 5 questions |
| Featured download links | 3 download links |
Key Issues & Findings
Homeowner Carol M. Root filed a petition with the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety (DFBLS) alleging that Candlewood Estates at Troon North Homeowners Association violated the community's declaration (CC&Rs). The association moved to dismiss, arguing that the dispute had to proceed under the private alternative dispute resolution mechanisms defined in the CC&Rs rather than an administrative hearing. An Administrative Law Judge granted the motion to dismiss on February 17, 2016. However, upon Root's motion for review, the Department granted a rehearing on May 25, 2016, concluding the ALJ's dismissal was contrary to law. Seeking to abort the rehearing, Candlewood Estates filed an Appeal for Judicial Review in Maricopa County Superior Court on July 1, 2016 (LC2016-000282). Judge Patricia Ann Starr dismissed the appeal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, holding that an agency order granting a rehearing does not terminate the administrative proceedings and is therefore not an appealable 'final administrative decision' under A.R.S. § 12-901(2). On March 8, 2018, the court entered an order awarding taxable costs to Root.
Under Arizona's Administrative Review Act, the Superior Court possesses jurisdiction only to review 'final administrative decisions' (A.R.S. § 12-905(A)). To be final under A.R.S. § 12-901(2), an administrative decision must affect legal rights or duties and terminate the proceeding before the agency.
Judge Starr rejected Candlewood's argument that the order was final simply because DFBLS included boilerplate text advising the parties of appeal rights. An order granting a rehearing explicitly restarts or continues agency proceedings rather than concluding them. Because the dispute remained pending before the agency, the HOA's filing was an impermissible interlocutory appeal.
The case also highlights the tension between CC&R dispute resolution provisions and statutory administrative remedies. While the HOA sought to enforce CC&R clauses to avoid state agency oversight, DFBLS determined that private declarations cannot strip the state of statutory authority to hear homeowner grievances under Arizona law.
For HOA boards and management attorneys, this case demonstrates that litigators cannot short-circuit unfavorable administrative rehearing orders by rushing to Superior Court. Appellate review of administrative actions requires strict adherence to finality rules. For homeowners, it confirms that when an agency grants a rehearing on the merits, the HOA cannot stall the process with premature appeals without facing dismissals and cost awards.