Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2003-015126: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Eagle Mountain Community Association.

Case Number

CV2003-015126

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

8/7/2003

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Julian, Melissa

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

No parties captured.

Minute Entries

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

01/17/2006

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius

Deputy

FILED: 01/20/2006

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
DARYL R WILSON
MARCUS D TAPPE

MINUTE ENTRY

1:35 p.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Defendant Double D’s Motion to
Dismiss or Compel Arbitration and Defendant Hoskin-Ryan Consultants Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William F. Shore III. Defendants are
represented by counsel, Daryl R. Wilson, David J. Cantelme, G. Michael Tryon, Marcus D.
Tappe and Roger E. Brodman.

Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

01/17/2006

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Counsel for Double D advises the Court that settlement has been reached and will be
finalized shortly and withdraws the Motion to Dismiss or Motion to Compel Arbitration.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant Double D’s Motion to Dismiss or Motion to
Compel Arbitration as moot.

Arguments are presented to the Court on Hoskin-Ryan Consultants Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment.

For reasons as stated on the record,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Hoskin-Ryan Consultant Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment.

Further discussions are held regarding Primatech LLC.’s Joinder in Hoskin-Ryan
Consultant Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Primatech LLC’s Motion for Summary
Judgment.

Further discussions are held regarding remaining dispositive motions currently filed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on January 25, 2006 at 1:30
p.m. (1 Hour) on all remaining motions:

• Eagle Mountain Investors LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment,
• Construction Inspection & Testing Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment,
• The Motion to Continue Trial,
• Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Eagle Mountain Investors LLC’s Experts, and
• Plaintiff’s Motion to Bifurcate.

Pursuant to the dismissal of Defendant R B C Contracting Inc,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying R B C Contracting Inc.’s Motion for Summary
Judgment as moot.

2:12 p.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

01/25/2006

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius

Deputy

FILED: 02/01/2006

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
THOMAS A WALCOTT
MARCUS D TAPPE

MINUTE ENTRY

1:30 p.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on several motions in this matter.
Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William F. Shore. Defendants are represented by counsel,
William A. Nebeker, Thomas A. alcott, Marcus D. Tappe and Roger E. Broadman.

Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

01/25/2006

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2

Arguments are presented to the Court on Construction Inspection & Testing’s Motion for
Summary Judgment.

IT IS ORDERED granting Construction Inspection & Testing’s Motion for Summary
Judgment for the reasons stated on the record.

Arguments are presented to the Court on Eagle Mountain Investors LLC’s (EMI) Motion
for Summary Judgment regarding standing issues.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED taking EMI’s Motion for Summary Judgment regarding
standing issues under advisement upon the submission of additional memoranda as stated on the
record. Plaintiff shall submit its memorandum before 5:00 p.m. on January 27, 2006.
Defendant shall submit its memorandum before 5:00 p.m. on January 30, 2006.

Plaintiff withdraws its Motion to Bifurcate as moot.

Arguments are presented to the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Eagle Mountain
Investors’ Expert.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED taking Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Eagle Mountain
Investors’ Expert under advisement upon the submission of Defendants’ Response to this
division. Defendant shall provide a copy of their response to Plaintiff before 5:00 p.m. on
Monday January 30, 2006. The parties shall advise this Court if there are any remaining issues
regarding experts after the review of Defendants’ response.

Arguments are presented to the Court on EMI’s Motion to Continue Trial.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendant’s Motion to Continue Trial, vacating
Trial date of March 7, 2006 and resetting same to July 7, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in this division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Pre-Trial Management Conference set for
February 27, 2006 and resetting same to June 30, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in this division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting deadline of March 15, 2006 for the parties to
complete the depositions as discussed with the Court. The parties are to contact this Court’s staff
for the setting of an immediate telephonic Status Conference should any further scheduling
disputes arise.

Discussions are held regarding settlement conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED referring this case to the court's Alternative Dispute
Resolution for the appointment of a judge pro tempore to conduct a settlement
conference. Counsel and/or the parties will receive a minute entry from ADR appointing

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

01/25/2006

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 3

the judge pro tempore. Counsel and any "pro per" parties will contact the appointed judge pro
tempore to arrange the date, time and location for the settlement conference. The judge pro
tempore is requested to conduct a settlement conference not later than April 15, 2006. The
Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference
so please do not contact that office.

2:58 p.m. Court stands in recess.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

02/03/2005

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 02/07/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
WILLIAM H DOYLE
G MICHAEL TRYON
ROBERT H WILLIS
STEPHEN E RICHMAN
SCOTT A BURDMAN
DEAN C ROBERTSON
P DOUGLAS FOLK
JOHN B EVEN
KENNETH M FRAKES
KEVIN J BLAKLEY
KENNETH P BEMIS

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court having received Third-Party Defendant RBC Contracting, Inc.’s Motion to
Strike Deadlines,

IT IS ORDERED setting Telephonic Status Conference for February 18, 2005 at
9:00 a.m. in this division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

02/03/2005

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable PETER C. REINSTEIN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Courthouse Courtroom 303
125 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6368

Counsel for RBC Contracting shall initiate the conference call.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/06/2006
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 02/13/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
The Court is in receipt of Wheeler Construction Inc.’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees
and Costs, the Ojection and Reply thereto.
IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument for February 21, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in this
division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/06/2006
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
Judge ROBERT E. MILES
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Courthouse
125 W. Washington, Courtroom 303
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 372-0754
Unless otherwise advised by the Court at oral argument, the parties should assume that
the Court has reviewed the parties’ memoranda. Accordingly, the parties should be prepared to
focus on the key issues in dispute and to answer questions from the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

02/18/2005

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 02/21/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS

MINUTE ENTRY

9:20 a.m. In chambers. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference. All
parties appear telephonically. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William Shore and Stephen
Richman. Defendant, Eagle Mountain Investors is represented by counsel, Marcus Tappe.
Defendant Wheeler is represented by counsel, Matt Bedwell. Defendant Wood, Patel & Assoc.
is represented by counsel, Ben Hodgson. Defendant RBC Contracting is represented by counsel,
Linda Fisher. Defendant Construction Inspecting is represented by counsel, Roger Brodman.
Defendant Development Coordination is represented by counsel, Kenneth Bemis. Defendant
L.R. Contreras is represented by counsel, Leonard Bell.

No court reporter is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

02/18/2005

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 2

Discussion is held.

IT IS ORDERED vacating Pretrial Management Conference set for August 1, 2005 at
8:30 a.m. and resetting same to February 27, 2006 at 8:30 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating 4-week trial set for August 9, 2005 and resetting
same to March 7, 2006 at 9:30 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating Telephonic Status Conference set for May 23,
2005 at 8:30 a.m.

Counsel inform the Court that they will confer and set forth deadlines for disclosure.

All other deadlines set forth in the Court’s original trial-setting minute entry remain
unchanged.

9:30 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/21/2006
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 02/23/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
MELANIE G MCBRIDE
MINUTE ENTRY
9:31 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Defendant Wheeler Construction’s
Motion for Attorney Fees in this matter. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William F. Tapia.
Defendant, Wheeler Construction, is represented by counsel, Melanie McBride.
Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.
Arguments are presented to the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/21/2006
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED for reasons as stated on the record, granting Attorneys Fees in the
amount of $5,927.50 without prejudice to Wheeler seeking additional amounts from the
arbitrator if appropriate.
9:45 a.m. Hearing concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/27/2006
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 03/08/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
The Court is in receipt of Third-Party Defendant Hoskin-Ryan Consulting’s Application
for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Taxable Costs and Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC’s
Objection thereto.
IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument for April 3, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. in this
division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
02/27/2006
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
Judge ROBERT E. MILES
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Courthouse
125 W. Washington, Courtroom 303
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 372-0754
Unless otherwise advised by the Court at oral argument, the parties should assume that
the Court has reviewed the parties’ memoranda. Accordingly, the parties should be prepared to
focus on the key issues in dispute and to answer questions from the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
03/13/2006
Docket Code 005
Form J000
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
A. Gonzalez
Deputy
FILED: 03/15/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
THOMAS A WALCOTT
STIPULATION AND ORDER
1:30 p.m.
IN CHAMBERS. This is the time set for Status Conference, telephonic.
Plaintiff appears through counsel William F. Shore, III. Defendants appear through counsel
Thomas Walcott. Appearances are telephonic.
No record is made.
Counsel confirm that the present parties are the only parties remaining in this matter.
After discussion and the Court finding that no postponements of the trial will result from
the proposed extension of the discovery deadline,
IT IS ORDERED approving the parties’ Stipulation and Agreement to Conduct
Discovery, all as set forth in the formal Order signed by the Court and filed this date.
1:35 p.m.
LATER:
IT IS ORDERED affirming the jury trial date of July 11, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., ten days
allotted, and Pretrial Management Conference date of June 30, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., one hour
allotted.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

03/17/2004

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 03/18/2004

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
MICHAEL G WALES

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
CARRIE A KERCSMAR

JAMES PATRICK ARMSTRONG

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court having received Plaintiff Eagle Mountain’s Motion for Scheduling
Conference,

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Comprehensive Pretrial Conference for April 5,
2004 at 9:15 a.m. for 15 minutes before:

The Honorable PETER C. REINSTEIN
Superior Court of Arizona
Old Courthouse
125 W. Washington
Courtroom 303 – 3rd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6368

Counsel for Plailntiff shall initiate the conference call.

Counsel for the Plaintiff(s) and Defendant(s) are to meet personally before the Pretrial
Conference to discuss those subjects listed under A.R.C.P., Rule 16(c). Counsel for Plaintiff(s)
and Defendant(s) shall prepare and file a Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum five judicial
days before the conference addressing all applicable subjects listed under Rule 16(c) and, in

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

03/17/2004

Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2

addition, a brief description of the nature of the case, the issues, and each party’s position
with respect to the issues and the estimated length of the trial.

If Counsel are unable to agree on any of the items in the Joint Pretrial Conference
Memorandum, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the memorandum.

Counsel are reminded that the Court may impose sanctions against Counsel and/or their
clients for failure to participate in good faith in the Joint Pretrial Conference Memorandum or the
Pretrial Conference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
03/20/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
W. Yank/T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 03/29/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has had under advisement Defendant Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC’s Motion
for Partial Summary Judgment. The Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Eagle Mountain Investors (“EMI”) asserts that Plaintiff lacks standing to sue regarding
alleged defects on property that EMI does not own or have responsibility to maintain, as opposed
to common areas that EMI does have the duty to maintain and manage. Specifically, EMI
challenges Plaintiff’s standing to sue regarding alleged defects on
1) Property owned by private homeowners within Eagle Mountain
2) Golf Course Land which is not part of the Master Common area (as defined in the CC
& R’s)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
03/20/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
3) Property owned or dedicated to a governmental entity such as Maricopa County, as
provided in the CC & R’s
The Court notes that Plaintiff’s Response to EMI’s Motion does not address the standing issue as
it applies to the Golf Course Land or property dedicated to governmental entities.
Section 16.1 of the CC & R’s for Eagle Mountain expressly states that Golf Course Land
(as defined in the CC & R’s) is not part of the Master Common Area for which Plaintiff is
responsible. The CC & R’s also state that “IT IS EXPRESSLY INTENDED… THAT EAGLE
MOUNATIN…NOT INCLUDE THE GOLF COURSE LAND”. Since neither the Plaintiff nor
the members of the Plaintiff’s Association have any interest in the Golf Course Land (id; §16.1),
Plaintiff is without standing to sue for alleged defects to the Golf Course Land.
The CC & R’s define “Exempt Property” to include all land and improvements owned by
or dedicated to and accepted by a political subdivision. The only references to “Exempt
Property” that the Court could find in the CC & R’s are in the definition of “Assessable
Property” and in section 6.1, regarding the number of memberships in the Association. Neither
reference aids in a determination of the issue here. However, the CC & R’s also provide that
portions of the Property dedicated to a governmental entity for public purposes are not subject to
the CC & Rs. Since the Plaintiff asserts its right to representational standing by virtue of its
duties under the CC & R’s, the Court concludes that it cannot sue for alleged defects to property
that is owned or dedicated to a governmental entity.
Whether the Plaintiff may sue for alleged damages to the property of individual lot
owners is a more difficult question. Plaintiff argues that it has representational standing pursuant
to Section 12.1 of the CC & Rs, but that provision only grants Plaintiff the right to enforce the
CC & R’s. This is not a suit to enforce the CC & Rs. Plaintiff also argues that it can bring this
claim as a Homeowners’ Association Dwelling Action. The statute defines “dwelling” for
purposes of such an action as a residential unit and property “either owned by a homeowners’
association or jointly by all members of a homeowners association”. The damage alleged here is
not to “residential units”, nor is it damage to jointly owned property. Instead, it is alleged
damage to property owned individually by various lot owners within Eagle Mountain. Thus,
these arguments are not persuasive.
In Armory Park Neighborhood Association v. Episcopal Community Services in Arizona,
148 Ariz 1, 712 P. 2d 914 (1985), the Supreme Court concluded that an association could sue on
behalf of its members if, given all the circumstances, the association has a legitimate interest in
an actual controversy involving its members and if judicial economy and administration will be
promoted by allowing representational appearance. The Court concludes that that standard is met
in this case and that Plaintiff will adequately and fairly represent the interests of its members.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff may not pursue claims in this case insofar as
they relate to alleged damage to Golf Course Land or property owned by or dedicated to a
governmental authority.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
03/20/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
The Court has also had under advisement Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike EMI’s Experts
pending advice from counsel as to what, if any, issues remain regarding experts. The Court has
not received notice of any issues still in dispute. Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion to Strike EMI’s Experts as moot.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
04/10/2006
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 04/14/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
MINUTE ENTRY
9:59 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on the Hoskin-Ryan’s Application for
Attorney Fees and Costs in this matter. Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, Marcus Tappe, for William A. Nebeker. Third Party Defendant Hoskin-Ryan is
represented by counsel, David Cantelme.
Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.
Arguments are presented.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
04/10/2006
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED granting the Application for Attorneys Fees and awarding fees and
costs in the amount of $18,975.93. Counsel for Defendant shall submit a proposed form of
Judgment.
10:07 a.m. Hearing concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
06/01/2006
Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 06/06/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
G MICHAEL TRYON
CRAIG L KELLER
JONATHAN D SCHNEIDER
P DOUGLAS FOLK
ORDER SIGNED
The Court has received and considered Hoskin-Ryan Consultants, Inc.’s proposed form
of Order and Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC’s objections thereto. The objections are denied.
The Order is signed by the Court on May 26, 2006, with the Rule 54(b) language stricken, and
filed (entered) by the clerk on June 1, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/08/2004

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 06/09/2004

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
MICHAEL G WALES

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

CARRIE A KERCSMAR
STEPHEN E RICHMAN

MINUTE ENTRY

8:42 a.m. In chambers. This is the time set for Telephonic Comprehensive Pretrial
Conference. All parties appear telephonically. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Michael
Wales. Defendant Eagle Mountain Investors is represented by counsel, Carrie Kercsmar,
Stephen Richman and William Nebeker.

No court reporter is present.

Discussion is held.

IT IS ORDERED setting Telephonic Status Conference for May 23, 2005 at 8:30 a.m.
to review length of trial. Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call.

IT IS ORDERED Adopting by reference, as an Order of the Court, the Joint Pretrial
Statement. The terms of the memorandum shall govern, unless inconsistent with any provisions
of this minute entry. References to “counsel” shall be read to include unrepresented parties.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting this matter for a 4-week jury trial for Tuesday,
August 9, 2005.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/08/2004

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

The Honorable PETER C. REINSTEIN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Courthouse
125 W. Washington, Courtroom 303
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6368

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING

Trial days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Tuesday through Friday.

PRETRIAL MOTIONS:

1.
All dispositive motions shall be filed at least 90 days before trial.

2.
Any Motions in Limine shall be filed thirty (30) days before the PTMC and
such motions must meet the test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 397,
499 P.2d 152 (1972): "The primary purpose of a motion in limine is to avoid
disclosing to the jury prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial." See also,
Ariz. Rules of Evidence, Rule 103(c). A written response to a motion in limine
may be filed no later than ten (10) days thereafter. The Court will rule on the
motions in limine without oral argument. No motions will be considered outside
of those filing limits. No replies shall be filed.

3.
All other pretrial motions shall be filed at least 60 days before trial. Motions not
filed in accordance with these deadlines will not be considered.

A Pretrial Management Conference (PTMC) is set for August 1, 2005 at 8:30 a.m. in
this division. Time allotted: 30 minutes.

At the PTMC, counsel who will try the case shall appear and be prepared to discuss and
resolve:

A.
Time limits for voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations and
closing arguments.

B.
Stipulations and objections regarding witnesses and exhibits. If time
permits, the court will rule on objections.

C.
Jury instructions, juror notebooks and verdict forms.

D.
Deposition summaries and excerpts from depositions including objections
thereto.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/08/2004

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

E.
Scheduling, equipment or interpreter issues.

F.
Status of settlement efforts.

G.
Motions in limine and other pending motions.

H.
Other matters addressed in the updated joint pretrial statement.

A joint pretrial statement (JPTS) is due three judicial days before the PTMC. The
following shall be filed with the JPTS:

A.
Proposed voir dire questions.

B.
A list to be read to the jury with names of all witnesses who may testify.

C.
A set of agreed-upon jury instructions.

D.
Separate sets of requested instructions that have not been agreed upon.
(Review Rosen v. Knaub, 175 Ariz. 329, 857 P.2d 381 (1993) and the
RAJI Civil 3d Statement of Purpose before requesting non-RAJI
instructions.)

E.
Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (if a request for same has
been or will be filed).

F.
A stipulated brief summary of the case, which the court can read at the
outset of voir dire.

*** ATTORNEYS AND ASSISTANTS---PLEASE READ NUMBER G CAREFULLY***

G.
All exhibits shall be exchanged 30 days before trial. Counsel shall confer
regarding exhibits so that duplicates are avoided. Counsel or their designated representative
shall call the division clerk at (602) 506-3813 no later than 10:00 a.m. ten days before trial
to make arrangements for marking exhibits and to inform the clerk the number of exhibits
counsel intend to mark for identification prior to trial. The exhibits will be marked serially
with Plaintiff's first, Defendant's second. Counsel shall advise the clerk, by signed stipulation or
on the record, which exhibits may be marked directly into evidence. Original depositions are
provided to the clerk for the record and are not marked as exhibits.

The parties have agreed to schedule a settlement conference through a private mediator.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/08/2004

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

One day’s jury fees will be assessed unless the court is notified of settlement by 2:00 p.m.
on the judicial day before trial.

8:47 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/13/2005

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 06/15/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
RICK K CARTER
STEPHEN E RICHMAN
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
JOHN R EVEN
KENNETH P BEMIS
MICHAEL G WALES

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court having received Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff Eagle Mountain Investors,
LLC’s Request for a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

06/13/2005

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED setting Telephonic Status Conference for July 7, 2005 at 8:45 a.m. in
this division.

The Honorable PETER C. REINSTEIN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building, Courtroom 1101
201 West Jefferson
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6368

Counsel for Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC shall initiate the conference call.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
06/30/2006
Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/06/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
PRETRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
9:34 a.m. This is the time set for Pretrial Management Conference. Plaintiff is
represented by counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A.
Nebeker, Marcus Tappe, and Thomas Walcott.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding time allocations for the ten-day jury trial set for July 11,
2006 in this division. In that regard, each side will be allotted 23 hours of the available trial
time to be allocated to opening statements, direct and cross-examinations, and closing arguments
as each party sees fit.
Discussion is held regarding trial exhibits. In that regard, Plaintiff seeks to mark 125
exhibits and Defendant seeks to mark 225 exhibits. All marked trial exhibits shall be delivered
to the courtroom clerk no later than 10:00 a.m. on July 5, 2006. Counsel stipulate to the
admission of all exhibits, with the exception of the Glos reports and the Pavement Maintenance
Information Source Report; although, counsel will discuss these exhibits further in an attempt to
stipulate to their admission as well.
Discussion is held regarding proposed trial witnesses. With regard to Plaintiff’s Motion
to Strike Eight Defense Witnesses, counsel for Defendant indicates Defendant will not be calling

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
06/30/2006
Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 2
Karl Thompson, Tom Thompson, Gordon Wark, Ken Walsh, Shi-en Shiau, or Paul Hoskin.
Therefore, the motion with regard to those witnesses is moot. With regard to witnesses Duane
Hunn and Michael Havill, Defendant is uncertain at this time whether they will be called.
Accordingly, Defendants will have until 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 to file a
response to the Motion to Strike; otherwise, the Court will assume those witnesses will not be
called to testify.
With regard to Defendant’s objection to Plaintiff’s witnesses Mary Day and Flynn
Duncan, Mary Day will not be allowed to testify as she was not previously disclosed; however,
Ms. Duncan, as well as any other previously-disclosed witness, may be called to testify.
Discussion is held regarding the use of juror notebooks. If counsel decide to utilize
notebooks, they shall discuss and agree on the content before presentation to the Court.
Counsel being unprepared to discuss jury instructions and verdict forms, these issues will
be discussed at a later date.
Discussion is held regarding the use of deposition testimony. In that regard, counsel
anticipate using deposition testimony for impeachment purposes only. Should counsel determine
further use is necessary, counsel shall consider presenting deposition summaries.
Counsel are advised they will be responsible for any special equipment needed
throughout the course of trial.
Oral argument is presented regarding Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding Financial
Discovery Concerning Punitive Damages.
IT IS ORDERED denying the motion.
Upon the Court’s review of Defendant’s Motion in Limine re: Plaintiff’s Consumer Fraud
Claim, the Court finds the motion to more appropriately be submitted as a Motion for Summary
Judgment. Based thereon,
IT IS ORDERED denying the motion as untimely.
Oral argument is presented regarding Defendant’s Motion in Limine re: Plaintiff’s
Improper Expenses Claim. Based on the representations made by counsel,
IT IS ORDERED denying the motion subject to objections during trial.
Oral argument is presented regarding Defendant’s Motion in Limine re: Evidence
Regarding Slope Stability.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
06/30/2006
Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 3
IT IS ORDERED precluding the expert from stating the slope will danger of injury or
loss of life; however, the expert may testify that the slope is unstable.
Counsel shall submit to the Court, prior to voir dire, a joint statement of the case to be
read during voir dire.
With regard to Defendant’s request for a site visit,
IT IS ORDERED denying that request.
Counsel are advised trial hours are generally Tuesdays through Fridays from 9:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. with appropriate breaks.
Discussion is held regarding a financial statement of the Homeowners’ Association that
has been requested by Defendant. Counsel for Plaintiff states he is not in possession of the
specific document requested by Defendant but has provided counsel with additional documents
that contain the figures derived from the financial statement in question.
10:50 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/11/2005

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 07/13/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
DAVID J CANTELME
JASON M KELLY

MINUTE ENTRY

8:49 a.m. In chambers. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference. William
Nebeker, counsel for Eagle Mountain Investors is present in chambers. All other parties appear
telephonically. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William Shore. Defendant Eagle Mountain is
represented by counsel, William Nebeker, Rick Carter, and Marcus Tappe. Defendant LR
Contreras is represented by counsel, Leonard Bell. Defendant Construction Inspecting is
represented by counsel, Roger Brodman. Defendant Carter & Burgess is represented by counsel,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/11/2005

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Denise Henslee and Jim Blair. Defendant Double D is represented by counsel, Craig Keller.
Defendant Wheeler Construction is represented by counsel, Dean Robertson. Defendant Sahuaro
is represented by counsel, Robert Willis. Defendant Brant & Greey is represented by counsel,
John Even. Also present are David Cantelme and Jason Kelly.

No court reporter is present.

Discussion is held.

IT IS ORDERED affirming 10-day jury trial for March 7, 2006.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming Final Pretrial Management Conference set for
February 27, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. in this division.

PRETRIAL MOTIONS:

1.
All dispositive motions shall be filed at least 90 days before trial.

2.
Any Motions in Limine shall be filed thirty (30) days before the PTMC.
Motions in Limine may and shall be filed only in accordance with Rule 7.2, Rules
of Civil Procedure (effective December 1, 2004). Prior to filing any Motion in
Limine, the parties must meet and confer. Unless prior written leave of court is
obtained for good cause shown, no party may file more than three (3) Motions in
Limine, including all subparts.

3.
All other pretrial motions shall be filed at least 60 days before trial. Motions not
filed in accordance with these deadlines will not be considered.

At the PTMC, counsel who will try the case shall appear and be prepared to
discuss and resolve:

A.
Time limits for voir dire, opening statements, witness examinations and
closing arguments.

B.
Stipulations and objections regarding witnesses and exhibits. If time
permits, the court will rule on objections.

C.
Jury instructions, juror notebooks and verdict forms.

D.
Deposition summaries and excerpts from depositions including objections
thereto.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/11/2005

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 3

E.
Scheduling, equipment or interpreter issues.

F.
Status of settlement efforts.

G.
Motions in limine and other pending motions.

H.
Other matters addressed in the updated joint pretrial statement.

A joint pretrial statement (JPTS) is due three judicial days before the PTMC. The
following shall be filed with the JPTS:

A.
Proposed voir dire questions.

B.
A list to be read to the jury with names of all witnesses who may testify.

C.
A set of agreed-upon jury instructions.

D.
Separate sets of requested instructions that have not been agreed upon.
(Review Rosen v. Knaub, 175 Ariz. 329, 857 P.2d 381 (1993) and the
RAJI Civil 3d Statement of Purpose before requesting non-RAJI
instructions.)

E.
Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (if a request for same has
been or will be filed).

F.
A stipulated brief summary of the case, which the court can read at the
outset of voir dire.

*** ATTORNEYS AND ASSISTANTS---PLEASE READ NUMBER G CAREFULLY***

G.
All exhibits shall be exchanged 30 days before trial. Counsel shall confer
regarding exhibits so that duplicates are avoided. Counsel or their designated representative
shall call the division clerk at (602) 506-3813 no later than 10:00 a.m. ten days before trial
to make arrangements for marking exhibits and to inform the clerk the number of exhibits
counsel intend to mark for identification prior to trial. The exhibits will be marked serially
with Plaintiff's first, Defendant's second. Counsel shall advise the clerk, by signed stipulation or
on the record, which exhibits may be marked directly into evidence. Original depositions are
provided to the clerk for the record and are not marked as exhibits.

The parties have agreed to schedule a settlement conference through a private mediator.

One day’s jury fees will be assessed unless the court is notified of settlement by 2:00
p.m. on the judicial day before trial.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/11/2005

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 4

Discussion is held re disclosure of third-party defendants’ expert witness.

IT IS ORDERED all expert witnesses and opinions (third-party defendants) shall be
disclosed no later than November 7, 2005.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall disclose any rebuttal opinion no later than
December 1, 2005.

9:00 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/11/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/12/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 1
Prior to the commencement of trial, Plaintiff’s exhibits 1-116 and Defendant’s exhibits
126-376 are marked for identification.
Pursuant to the stipulation of counsel during the June 30, 2006 Pretrial Management
Conference,
Plaintiff’s exhibits 1-39, 41-88, 93, 95, 96, 98-116 and Defendant’s exhibits 126-376 are
received in evidence.
FILED:
1. Deposition of David R. Perry, dated June 28, 2006
2. Deposition of Steven Michael Pritulsky, dated May 4, 2006
3. Deposition of John F. Suriano, dated May 5, 2006
4. Deposition of J. David Deatherage, dated June 13, 2006
5. Deposition of Robert W. McMichael, dated June 16, 2006
10:37 a.m. This is the time set for Jury Trial. Plaintiff is represented by counsel,
William F. Shore. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and Marcus D.
Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant. The prospective jury panel is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/11/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Voir dire examination.
12:09 p.m. Court stands at recess.
12:11 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is not present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court advises counsel of the jurors the Court is inclined to excuse due to hardships
and/or conflicts. Based thereon, certain jurors are stricken.
Counsel pass the panel for cause.
12:16 p.m. Court stands at recess.
1:35 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Ten (10) persons are selected and sworn to act as trial jurors in this case.
FILED: Jury List
The Preliminary Instructions are read to the jury by the Court.
FILED: Preliminary Instructions
Opening statements.
2:55 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:21 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/11/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Opening statements continue.
4:28 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on July 12, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/12/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/14/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 2
9:37 a.m. Trial to a jury continues from July 11, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and
Marcus Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Juror #8 (originally Juror #23) is present outside the presence of the remaining jurors.
Juror #8 advises the Court and counsel of hardships he will encounter sitting as a juror in this
case.
9:41 a.m. Juror #8 is excused from the courtroom; court remains in session.
Court and counsel discuss the comments of Juror #8. Based thereon, the Court excuses
Juror #8 from further service in this case.
9:43 a.m. Court stands at recess.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/12/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
9:49 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present (with the exception of the excused juror).
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Plaintiff’s case:
Burton Fischer (a/k/a Burt K. Fischer) is sworn and testifies.
10:51 a.m. Court stands at recess.
11:12 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Burton Fischer continues testifying.
11:57 a.m. Court stands at recess.
1:30 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Burton Fischer continues testifying.
The Court has received a question from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Question (1)
The Court receives additional questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the
same outside the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/12/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3
2:56 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:17 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Burton Fischer continues testifying.
3:53 p.m. The jury is excused for the evening.
3:53 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:55 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is not present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding the objections to the Glos report exhibits: Plaintiff’s exhibits
89-92, 94, and 97. In that regard, the Court will not permit the narrative portions of the report(s)
to come into evidence. With regard to the attachments to the report(s), they may be permissible
after review of same by counsel.
Discussion is held regarding the Motion to Strike Defense Witness Duane Hunn. Based
thereon,
IT IS ORDERED precluding Mr. Hunn from testifying in this matter.
Counsel shall submit no later than Monday, July 17, 2006 by 4:00 p.m. a joint set of
jury instructions counsel agree should be given in this case and separate sets of those not in
agreement.
4:10 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on July 13, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/13/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/17/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 3
9:40 a.m. Trial to a jury continues from July 12, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and
Marcus Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court advises the jury of events in the downtown area on July 14, 2006 which may
affect their commute to the courthouse.
Plaintiff’s case continues:
Richard Kloster is sworn and testifies.
10:48 a.m. Court stands at recess.
11:06 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/13/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Defendant’s exhibit 377 is marked for identification.
Richard Kloster continues testifying.
George H. Glos, III is sworn and testifies.
Plaintiff’s exhibit 378 is marked for identification.
By stipulation, Plaintiff’s exhibit 378 is received in evidence.
11:58 a.m. Court stands at recess.
1:31 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
George H. Glos, III continues testifying.
Plaintiff’s exhibit 379 is marked for identification.
By stipulation, Plaintiff’s exhibit 379 is received in evidence.
2:53 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:09 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
George H. Glos, III continues testifying.
4:30 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on July 14, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/14/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/17/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 4
9:32 a.m. Trial to a jury continues from July 13, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and
Marcus Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Plaintiff’s case continues:
George H. Glos, III resumes the stand and testifies further.
10:38 a.m. Court stands at recess.
10:54 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/14/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
George H. Glos, III continues testifying.
The Court receives questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)
Gary Lee Freed is sworn and testifies.
11:56 a.m. Court stands at recess.
1:30 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court addresses the jury regarding a jury question received over the lunch hour.
FILED: Jury Question (1)
Gary Lee Freed continues testifying.
The Court receives a question from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Question (1)
LET THE RECORD REFLECT the following defense witness is taken out of order:
Laura Ziff is sworn and testifies.
2:49 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:10 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/14/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3
Laura Ziff continues testifying.
The Court receives questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (3)
Plaintiff’s case continues:
Ann Flynn Duncan is sworn and testifies.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT the following defense witness is taken out of order:
Steven Michael Pritulsky is sworn and testifies.
4:31 p.m. Court stands at recess until 9:30 a.m. on July 18, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/15/2005

Docket Code 078
Form V078A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 07/18/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
STEPHEN E RICHMAN
SCOTT A BURDMAN
KENNETH P BEMIS
JONATHAN D SCHNEIDER
DAVID AARON BROWN

INACTIVE CALENDAR

The Court is advised this case has been settled as to Defendant Specialty Contractors of
Arizona, Inc. only.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

07/15/2005

Docket Code 078
Form V078A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED placing this matter on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal as to
Defendant Specialty Contractors of Arizona, Inc. only on September 15, 2005 without further
notice unless prior to said date Judgment is entered or filed, a Stipulation for Dismissal is
presented, or a Motion to Set and Certificate of Readiness is filed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/18/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 07/21/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 5
Prior to beginning of trial, Defendant’s exhibit 380 and 381 are marked for identification.
9:32 a.m. Trial to a jury continues from July 14, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and
Marcus Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Plaintiff’s case continues:
Stefen Gustafson is sworn and testifies.
10:48 a.m. Court stands at recess.
11:07 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/18/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Stefen Gustafson resumes the stand and testifies further.
The witness is excused.
The parties stipulate to allow the testimony of a defense witness out of order.
John Suraino is sworn and testifies.
Defendant’s exhibit 381 is received in evidence.
11:57 a.m. Court stands at recess.
1:29 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives
present. The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Scott Randall Smith is sworn and testifies.
The Court receives questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)
2:49 p.m. Court stands in recess.
3:05 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective counsel and the party representatives present.
The jury is present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
Randy Harrel is sworn and testifies.
The Court receives a question from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
of the hearing of the jury.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/18/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Question (1)
The witness is excused.
Plaintiffs rest.
Defendants’ Case:
John Suriano resumes the stand and testifies further.
The witness is excused.
4:07 p.m. The jury is excused until 9:30 a.m. on July 19, 2006.
Court remains in session.
Trial schedule is discussed off the record.
4:13 p.m. Court stands in recess.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/19/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 07/21/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 6
Prior to beginning of trial, Plaintiff’s exhibit 382 through and including 387 are marked
for identification.
10:03 a.m. Trial to a jury continues from July 18, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by
counsel, William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and
Marcus Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant. The jury is not present.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court advises that Juror # 5 will not be present due to illness and is excused from any
further consideration of this case. Juror # 4 is not present at this time, Court’s staff is attempting
to locate.
Oral arguments are presented on Defendants’ Rule 50 Motion re Implied Warranty.
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendants’ Motion regarding Implied Warranty for reasons
as stated on the record.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/19/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
Based on that ruling, Plaintiff withdraws all remaining claims except for the consumer
fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims.
Arguments are presented on Defendants’ Rule 50 Motion regarding Consumer Fraud.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion regarding Consumer Fraud for
reasons as stated on the record.
Arguments are presented on Defendants’ Rule 50 Motion regarding Fiduciary Claim.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion regarding Fiduciary Claim for
reasons as stated on the record.
10:43 a.m. The jury is now present.
Defendants’ case continues:
Steven Michael Pritulsky resumes the stand and testifies further.
Plaintiff’s Exhibit #387 is received in evidence.
The Court receives a question from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same outside
of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Question (1)
The witness is excused.
Bill Vickers is sworn and testifies.
The witness is excused.
Mark Allen Voigt is sworn and testifies.
The witness is excused
11:55 a.m. Court stands in recess.
1:30 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/19/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
David Perry is sworn and testifies.
2:55 p.m. Court stands in recess.
3:19 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
David Perry resumes the stand and testifies further.
Defendant’s exhibit # 388 is marked for identification.
The Court receives written questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (3)
David Deatherage is sworn and testifies.
4:29 p.m. Court stands in recess until 9:30 a.m. July 20, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/20/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 07/28/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 7
9:34 a.m. Trial to jury continues from July 19, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by counsel,
William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and Marcus
Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant.
The jury is present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Defendant’s case continues:
Dave Deatherage resumes the stand and testifies further.
10:38 a.m. Court stands in recess.
10:55 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Dave Deatherage resumes the stand and testifies further.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/20/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 2
The Court receives written questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)
The witness is excused.
11:57 a.m. Court stands in recess.
1:30 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Robert McMichael is sworn and testifies.
2:47 p.m. Court stands in recess.
3:03 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Robert McMichael resumes the stand and testifies further.
The Court receives written questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)
The witness is excused.
Defendants rests.
Plaintiff’s rebuttal:
George H. Glos, III, having previously been sworn, resumes the stand and testifies further.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/20/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 3
The Court receives written questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (2)
The witness is excused.
4:24 p.m. The jury is excused until 9:30 a.m. on July 21, 2006.
4:27 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Final jury instructions, forms of verdicts are discussed.
5:05 p.m. Court stands in recess.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/21/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius
Deputy
FILED: 07/28/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 8
9:43 a.m. Trial to jury continues from July 20, 2006. Plaintiff is represented by counsel,
William F. Shore, III. Defendant is represented by counsel, William A. Nebeker and Marcus
Tappe. Also present are various members of the Plaintiff Association and an officer
representative of the Defendant.
The jury is present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Plaintiff’s rebuttal case continues:
Burt Fisher, previously sworn, resumes the stand and testifies further.
The Court receives written questions from the jury. Court and counsel discuss the same
outside of the hearing of the jury.
The witness testifies further.
FILED: Jury Questions (6)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/21/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 2
The witness is excused.
Plaintiff rests.
10:32 a.m. The Court stands in recess.
10:34 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Final jury instructions, forms of verdicts are discussed.
Defendant renews its Rule 50 motions.
IT IS ORDERED denying the Defendant’s Rule 50 motions.
10:43 a.m. Court stands in recess.
10:54 a.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present.
The jury is present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Final jury instructions are read to the jury.
Closing statements are presented to the jury.
12:10 p.m. Court stands in recess.
1:36 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Closing statements continue.
2:54 p.m. Court stands in recess.
3:16 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective parties and counsel present. The jury is
present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/21/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V012
Page 3
Closing statements continue.
The jury is further instructed re: the verdict forms.
FILED: Jury Instructions
3:43 p.m. The jury retires in charge of sworn bailiffs to consider their verdicts.
4:20 p.m. Court stands in recess until 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 25, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/25/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/28/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 9
Trial/jury deliberations continues from July 21, 2006.
Let the record reflect the Court’s bailiff is sworn to take charge of the jury during the
jury’s deliberations.
10:05 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations begin.
10:10 a.m. Plaintiff is represented (telephonically) by counsel, William F. Shore, III.
Defendant is represented (telephonically) by co-counsel, Marcus Tappe.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court has received a question from the jury; same is read into the record and
discussed. Based thereon, counsel stipulate to provide three demonstrative charts for use during
the jury’s deliberations.
10:13 a.m. Court stands at recess.
4:05 p.m. Deliberations stand at recess until 9:00 a.m. on July 26, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/26/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/28/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 10
9:20 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations continue from July
25, 2006.
9:27 a.m. Plaintiff is represented (telephonically) by counsel, William F. Shore, III.
Defendant is represented (telephonically) by co-counsel, Marcus Tappe.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court has received a question from the jury; same is read into the record and
discussed. The agreed-upon answer will be written out and submitted to the jury via the bailiff.
9:29 a.m. Court stands at recess.
3:45 p.m. Deliberations stand at recess until 9:00 a.m. on July 27, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/27/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/31/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 11
9:30 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations continue from July
26, 2006.
11:41 a.m. Plaintiff is represented (telephonically) by counsel, William F. Shore, III.
Defendant is represented (telephonically) by co-counsel, Marcus Tappe.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court has received a question from the jury; same is read into the record and
discussed. Based thereon, the requested page from exhibit 70 will be copied and provided to the
jury via the Court’s bailiff.
11:42 a.m. Court stands at recess.
2:07 p.m. Plaintiff is represented (telephonically) by counsel, William F. Shore, III.
Defendant is represented (telephonically) by co-counsel, Marcus Tappe.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/27/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
The Court has received a question from the jury; same is read into the record and
discussed. Based thereon, the Court will provide the jury with one calculator.
2:08 p.m. Court stands at recess.
3:45 p.m. Deliberations recess until 9:00 a.m. on July 28, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
07/28/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
K. Ballard
Deputy
FILED: 07/31/2006
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 12
9:20 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations continue from July
27, 2006.
1:58 p.m. Plaintiff is represented (telephonically) by counsel, William F. Shore, III.
Defendant is represented (telephonically) by co-counsel, Marcus Tappe.
A digital audio and video recording of this proceeding is being made by the “For the
Record” recording system in lieu of a court reporter.
The Court has received a note (as opposed to a question) from the jury; same is read into
the record and briefly discussed. In that regard, counsel are advised that Judge Swann will be
available to take the verdict in this case in this Court’s absence, if one is reached.
FILED: Jury Note
2:02 p.m. Court stands at recess.
2:50 p.m. Deliberations stand at recess until 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, August 1, 2006.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/03/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
08/01/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
M. Sahli
Deputy
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY 13
10:08 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations continue from
July 28, 2006.
10:50 a.m. The jury informs the bailiff they are taking a brief recess from deliberations.
11:10 a.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations resume.
12:00 p.m. Jury recesses for lunch.
1:26 p.m. The jury is all present in the jury room and deliberations resume.
3:55 p.m. Court reconvenes. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, William F. Shore.
Defendant is represented by counsel, Marcus Tappe and Rachel Nies. The Honorable Peter B.
Swann presides.
A recording of this proceeding is made by CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
08/01/2006
Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2
The jury is all present in the jury box and by their foreperson return into court their
verdict, which is read and recorded by the clerk and is as follows:
“We, the Jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths,
do find in favor of the Association and against Defendant Eagle Mountain Investors, L.L.C., and
find the full damages to be $150,000.00.
Signed: Foreperson”
At the request of Defendant’s counsel, the jurors are polled and each juror responds that
this is his or her true verdict.
3:58 p.m. Trial concludes.
FILED: Verdicts; Worksheet; Jury Questions (3)
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that a jury question presented to the Court on July 27,
2006 and returned to the jury was inadvertently misplaced during deliberations. This question is
not filed as part of the permanent record. The question was read into the record (FTR) and is
preserved in the digital recording of the proceedings.
IT IS ORDERED that jury fees be assessed against Defendant Eagle Mountain
Investors, L.L.C., in the sum of $2,404.26, all in accordance with the formal written Judgment
for Jury Fees signed by the Court on August 1, 2006 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on
August 1, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

08/16/2005

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 08/18/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
MICHAEL G WALES

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro Pipeline Corporations, Inc.’s
Motion for Summary Judgment, the Plaintiff’s Response, and the Reply.

Based upon the Court’s consideration for the above, the Court finds that summary
judgment is appropriate as to the claims against Sahuaro Pipeline. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED granting Sahuaro Pipelines’ Motion for Summary.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

09/20/2005

Docket Code 047
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 09/22/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
STEPHEN E RICHMAN
SCOTT A BURDMAN
KENNETH P BEMIS
JONATHAN D SCHNEIDER
DAVID AARON BROWN

JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

This case was placed on the Inactive Calendar for dismissal as to Defendant Specialty
Contractors of Arizona, Inc. only on September 15, 2005 unless a certain action was taken prior
to that date. No action having been taken,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

09/20/2005

Docket Code 047
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED dismissing this case without prejudice.

/ s / HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN

JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/03/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
09/29/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
E. Parrish
Deputy
EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III
v.
EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER
RULING
The Court has received and considered the various filings relating to Defendant Eagle
Mountain Investors, L.L.C.’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees, the Association’s Rule 58(g)
Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, and Defendant Eagle Mountain Investors
L.L.C.’s Objection to Plaintiff’s Statement of Costs and Notice of Taxation of Costs.
There were essentially two claims alleged by Plaintiff in this case – the breach of
fiduciary duty/financial claim and the construction defect claim. The damages sought by
Plaintiff with respect to each of these claims exceeded the amount of the jury verdict of
$150,000.00. Thus, there is no way to know if the jury’s award was for the financial claim, the
construction claim, or a combination thereof. While the verdict was close to the amount
Defendant suggested should be awarded for both claims, it would be pure speculation to say that
the jury adopted Defendant’s argument.
Since there is no way to know if the jury awarded anything on the construction defect
claim, the Court cannot conclude that the fee provision of the Purchaser Dwelling Act applies.
As a result, attorneys’ fees, expert fees, or costs cannot be awarded under that statute. However,
both parties agree that both claims in this case arose out of contract, so that an award of
attorneys’ fees would be appropriate for that reason. Defendant, having made a written offer of

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
09/29/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
settlement of $770,000.00 prior to trial, which offer was rejected by Plaintiff, asserts it is entitled
to fees pursuant to the following provision of A.R.S. § 12-341.01(A):
If a written settlement offer is rejected and the judgment finally
obtained is equal to or more favorable to the offeror than an offer
made in writing to settle any contested action arising out of a
contract, the offeror is deemed to be the successful party from the
date of the offer and the court may award the successful party
reasonable attorney fees.
Plaintiff, on the other hand, contends it is entitled to fees pursuant to the Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Eagle Mountain, and that the Declaration trumps the
above-quoted statutory provision.
Assuming that the Declaration provides for an award of fees in this case, the Court
concludes that the above-referenced statutory provision still applies.1 As a result, because the
jury verdict was more favorable to Defendant than Defendant’s settlement offer, Defendant is
“the successful party from the date of the offer” and the Court may award it a reasonable fee. In
addition, however, a logical construction of the statute allows for two successful parties in the
circumstances of this case: one before the date of the offer and one after the date of the offer. 2
Thus, Plaintiff, which achieved a verdict in its favor (albeit one less favorable than Defendant’s
offer) is also a “successful party.”
In such circumstances, fees would most logically be awarded in accordance with the
amount of fees incurred by the respective parties before and after the offer. Such an allocation is
easier with parties like Defendant, which incurred fees on an hourly rate basis, but less so with a
party incurring a contingent fee, like the Plaintiff. The Court notes that had Plaintiff incurred
fees on an hourly basis, the amount incurred prior to the settlement offer would have far
exceeded the amount of the contingent fee actually incurred ($52,500.00). Furthermore, had
Plaintiff accepted the settlement offer, it would have owed its counsel a fee of $231,000 (30% of
$770,000) for work done prior to the date of the offer.
In the exercise of its discretion, the Court awards Plaintiff the full amount of the
contingent fee it incurred, $52,500. With regard to Defendant’s request for fees incurred after
the date of the settlement offer, Plaintiff’s only argument that they are not reasonable is that
Defendant’s counsel appears to have done a substantial amount of work in the period after the

1 By virtue of this conclusion, the Court need not decide the issue of whether any contractual attorneys’ fee
provisions apply under the circumstances and posture of this case.
2 If this were not the case, there would be no reason for the words “from the date of the offer.” Instead, the statute
would just declare the offeror to be “the successful party,” period.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2003-015126
09/29/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
offer. Plaintiff does not contend the work was unnecessary or duplicative, or that the hourly
rates were unreasonable. In the exercise of its discretion, the Court awards Defendant
$203,611.50 as a reasonable fee from the date of the settlement offer. In making these awards,
the Court has reviewed and considered the various factors for making a fee award as discussed in
Associated Indemnity Corporation v. Warner.
Finally, in the exercise of its discretion, the Court concludes that because Plaintiff
achieved some award, it may be considered the successful party for purposes of an award of
costs. The Court awards Plaintiff the amount of $12,102.64 for filing fees, service fees, and
deposition costs. The Court concludes the other expenses claimed by Plaintiff may not be
awarded as costs.
Counsel for the parties shall confer to attempt to stipulate to a form of judgment
consistent with the jury’s verdict and these rulings. If no stipulation is reached by October 12,
2006, each party shall submit its proposed form of final judgment by October 16, 2006.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

10/14/2005

Docket Code 094
Form V094
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Corriveau

Deputy

FILED: 10/19/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument on Counsel for Sahuaro Pipeline Corporation,
Inc.'s Notice of Lodging Rule 54(b) Final Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro
Pipeline Corporation, Inc. for October 24, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. in this division, Old Court House,
125 W. Washington, Courtroom 303, Phoenix, AZ 85003.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

10/24/2005

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
M. Sahli

Deputy

FILED: 10/26/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
WILLIAM H DOYLE
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
G MICHAEL TRYON
ROBERT H WILLIS
JAMES L BLAIR
KENNETH P BEMIS
JAN-GEORG ROESCH
DEAN C ROBERTSON
SCOTT A BURDMAN
P DOUGLAS FOLK
KENNETH M FRAKES
DAVID AARON BROWN

MINUTE ENTRY

1:41 p.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument re Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro
Pipeline Corporation’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees. Third-Party Defendant is represented by
counsel, Robert Willis. Defendant Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC is represented by counsel,
Judith Downs. Third-Party Defendant Wheeler Construction is represented by counsel, Matt
Bedwell.

Court reporter, Treva Colwell is present.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

10/24/2005

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2

Argument is heard.

IT IS ORDERED taking the matter under advisement.

The Court having received Third-Party Defendant Wheeler Construction, Inc.’s Motion
for Summary Judgment,

IT IS ORDERED setting oral argument for November 21, 2005, at 11:00 a.m., before:

The Honorable PETER C. REINSTEIN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Old Courthouse
125 W. Washington, Courtroom 303
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-63681

If counsel cite significant out-of-state case law, the Court will appreciate receiving a copy
of the case law with the Court’s copy of the pleading.

1:47 p.m. Matter concludes.

1 Effective November 7, 2005, this matter will be transferred to the Honorable Robert Miles at this same address.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

11/21/2005

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius

Deputy

FILED: 11/29/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS
ROBERT P RUTILA
MELANIE G MCBRIDE
GARY L POPHAM JR.
THOMAS A WALCOTT
MICHAEL G GAUGHAN

MINUTE ENTRY

11:05 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Third Party Defendant Wheeler
Construction Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Counsel present are William A. Nebeker,
Melanie G. McBride, Gary L. Popham, Jr., Thomas A. Walcott, Michael G. Gaughan, and
Robert P. Rutila.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

11/21/2005

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.

Discussions are held regarding status of motions filed.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on the Motion to Compel Arbitration and
Wheeler’s Motion for Summary Judgment to December 19, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. (1 Hour) in this
division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Response to the Motion to Compel Arbitration
shall be filed not later than November 29, 2005.

11:35 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

The Court having reviewed all current pending motions,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral argument for January 17, 2006 at 1:30 p.m.
(60 minutes) on the following motions:

• Third-Party Defendant Hoskin-Ryan’s Motion for Summary Judgment;
• Third-Party Defendant R.B.C. Contracting, Inc.’s Motion for Summary
Judgment; and
• Third-Party Defendant Double D Construction, Inc.’s Motion for Summary
Disposition on Double D’s Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

11/22/2005

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius

Deputy

FILED: 12/07/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion for Summary Disposition on Double D’s Motion to
Dismiss Third Party Complaint.

IT IS ORDERED, that Eagle Mountain Investors, L.L.C. shall have until December 5,
2005 in which to file any response to Double D’s Motion to Dismiss Third Party Complaint. If a
response is not filed by that date, Double D may re-urge its Motion for Summary Disposition.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

12/19/2005

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ROBERT E. MILES
T. Melius

Deputy

FILED: 12/22/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS

MINUTE ENTRY

10:14 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on the Third Party Defendant’s Motion
to Dismiss Without Prejudice or Alternatively, to Compel Arbitration. Counsel present are
Melanie McBride, William Nebeker, Leonard M. Bell, David J. Cantelme and Robert Rutila.

Court reporter, Scott Kindle, is present.

Arguments are presented to the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

12/19/2005

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED granting Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for reasons as
stated on the record.

10:44 a.m. Hearing concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

12/22/2005

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PETER C. REINSTEIN
G. Verbil

Deputy

FILED: 12/26/2005

EAGLE MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
WILLIAM F SHORE III

v.

EAGLE MOUNTAIN INVESTORS L L C
WILLIAM A NEBEKER

LEONARD M BELL
ROGER E BRODMAN
DAVID J CANTELME
WILLIAM H DOYLE
ANDREW M FEDERHAR
DENISE J HENSLEE
CHRISTOPHER D HOSSACK
CRAIG L KELLER
MITCHELL J RESNICK
DEAN C ROBERTSON
G MICHAEL TRYON
MEREDITH L VIVONA
ROBERT H WILLIS

MINUTE ENTRY

This matter having been presented to the Court on Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro
Pipeline Corporation, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and the Court having granted same;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that FINAL JUDGMENT pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. Proc.
54(b) is granted and entered in favor of Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro Pipeline Corporation,
Inc. and against Third-Party Plaintiff Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC an Arizona Limited
Liability Corporation.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2003-015126

12/22/2005

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that this Court grants Third-Party Defendant
Sahuaro Pipeline Corporation, Inc.’s September 2, 2005 its Motion for and Award of Attorney’s
Fees and that Third-Party Plaintiff Eagle Mountain Investors, LLC is to compensate Third-Party
Defendant Sahuaro Pipeline Corporation, Inc. in the amount of $3,328.72, plus Post-Judgment
interest accruing at the statutory rate of 10% per annum, until said total amount is paid in full.

The above is all in accordance with the formal written Rule 54(b) Final Judgment and
Order Granting Fees and Costs to Third-Party Defendant Sahuaro Pipeline Corporation,
Inc. signed by the Court on December 21, 2005 and filed (entered) on December 23, 2005.

Documents