Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2005-015308: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for North Canyon Ranch Owners Association.

Case Number

CV2005-015308

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

9/30/2005

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Herrod, Michael

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/24/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
01/22/2007
Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Application for Award of Attorney Fees. No
response has been filed.
Pursuant to Rule 7.1(b), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, the court deems the failure to
respond within the time permitted by the rules to be a consent to the granting of the motion. In
addition, the court has considered the motion(s) and all attachments.
The court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and that the amount requested is
reasonable.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff’s Application for Award of Attorney Fees all in
accordance with the formal written Judgment on Foreclosure signed by the court on January 22,
2007 and entered (filed) by the clerk on January 22, 2007.
Pursuant to Rule 3.2(i), the Clerk’s office is required to notify all parties when an order is signed by the
Court, either by mailing a conformed copy, or by minute entry. In the future, please provide envelopes and copies of
the order when submitting an order for the court’s signature so that all parties receive a copy of the signed order.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/09/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
02/08/2007
Docket Code 005
Form V005
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER PHEMONIA L. MILLER
P. Valenzuela
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
MARK E LINES
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
LEADER MORTGAGE COMPANY,
THE
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM,
STATUTORY AGENT
3225 N CENTRAL AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85012
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: SINGLE FAMILY NOTES
BRANCH
451 SEVENTH ST, SW
WASHINGTON DC 20410
CIVIL DEFAULT HEARING
Courtroom 001
1:36 p.m. Counsel Mark Lines appears on behalf of Plaintiff.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
02/08/2007
Docket Code 005
Form V005
Page 2
A recording of this proceeding is made by CD (FTR) in lieu of a court reporter.
Mark E. Lines is sworn under oath and testifies.
Renee A. Berry having failed an Answer,
IT IS ORDERED vacating today’s hearing as to Renee A. Berry.
The Court finds that Defendants Leader Mortgage Company and Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development were personally served, failed to file an Answer, and failed to appear
for today’s hearing.
The Court further finds that all statutory obligations have been met.
IT IS ORDERED granting judgment against Defendants Leader Mortgage Company and
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Mr. Lines will submit a form of judgment and
amended application for attorney fees, within seven days.
Division staff review: February 16, 2007
1:40 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
03/15/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
03/13/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received and reviewed Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration and Relief
Under Rule 59, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.
Good cause appearing,
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration and Relief
Under Rule 59, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall file a response to Defendant’s Motion for
Reconsideration and Relief Under Rule 59, Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure on or before
March 29, 2007.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/09/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
04/03/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
LEADER MORTGAGE COMPANY,
THE
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM,
STATUTORY AGENT
3225 N CENTRAL AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85012
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: SINGLE FAMILY NOTES
BRANCH
451 SEVENTH ST, SW
WASHINGTON DC 20410
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received and reviewed defendant Renee A. Berry’s February 5, 2007,
Motion for Reconsideration and plaintiff’s Response thereto. No reply is allowed. Rule 7.1(e)
of Civil Procedure.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
04/03/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
The court also received on April 2, 2007 a pleading entitled “Response to Plaintiff’s
Response to Motion for Reconsideration and Relief Under Rule 59, Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure and Response to Plaintiff’s Reply to Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Request for
Hearing”. This pleading is not allowed by the Rules of Civil Procedure and was not considered.
Plaintiff is correct in its assertion that the court did not actually grant defendant’s Motion
for Reconsideration. What the court meant was that the court, being new to this calendar, would
consider defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration and the plaintiff’s Response if plaintiff elected
to file one after receiving the court’s order giving plaintiff the right to do so.
Defendant raised the following points in her motion;
1. Plaintiff did not serve copies of their pleadings on defendant;
2. Defendant has a just and valid defense;
3. Plaintiff was not a corporation at the time its complaint was filed; and
4. Plaintiff’s motion for alternate service should not have been granted.
The court rules as follows on the points raised by defendant:
1. The motion is denied. Judge Schneider has ruled on this issue and defendant’s
credibility is questionable considering that she at one time claimed not to have
received plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment but responded to it.
2. This issue has been foreclosed by Judge Schneider’s judgment in this case.
Any consideration by this judicial officer would be a horizontal appeal which
is prohibited, except under very limited circumstances which do not exist in
this case.
3. This issue has been foreclosed by Judge Schneider’s judgment in this case.
Any consideration by this judicial officer would be a horizontal appeal which
is prohibited, except under very limited circumstances which do not exist in
this case.
4. This issue has been foreclosed by Judge Schneider’s judgment in this case.
Any consideration by this judicial officer would be a horizontal appeal which
is prohibited, except under very limited circumstances which do not exist in
this case.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Renee A. Berry’s Motion for Reconsideration is
DENIED.
The court has also received and reviewed defendant Renee A. Berry’s Motion to Set
Aside Judgment and Request for Hearing. The motion is DENIED. There was no default

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
04/03/2007
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
hearing on January 22, 2007, which involved defendant or anyone else. Judge Schneider entered
judgment in this case in conformity with his November 30, 2006, ruling.
The court’s attention has also been drawn to defendant Renee A. Berry’s document
entitled: “Request for Information and Motion to Continue”. That motion is DENIED as moot.
Plaintiff’s request for relief against defendant Berry was withdrawn at the hearing and there is
nothing for the court to consider in regard to that pleading.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED approving and settling formal written Amended and Final
Judgment on Foreclosure signed by the court April 2, 2007 and filed (entered) by the clerk April
3, 2007.
Pursuant to Rule 3.2(i), the Clerk’s office is required to notify all parties when an order is signed by the
Court, either by mailing a conformed copy, or by minute entry. In the future, please provide envelopes when
submitting an order for the court’s signature so that all parties receive a copy of the signed order.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/03/2007 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
07/02/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
E. Parrish
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
LEADER MORTGAGE COMPANY,
THE
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM,
STATUTORY AGENT
3225 N CENTRAL AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85012
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: SINGLE FAMILY NOTES
BRANCH
451 SEVENTH ST, SW
WASHINGTON DC 20410
ORDER OF THE COURT
The Court has received and reviewed Defendant’s Motion for a Stay of Enforcement of
Judgment.
Defendant’s motion is DENIED.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
07/02/2007
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
Counsel and any self-represented parties are advised that the Clerk of the Maricopa
County Superior Court has converted its case files to an electronic format and case files are
no longer made available to the divisions. Therefore it is imperative that counsel follow
Maricopa County Local Rule 3.2 which requires counsel to deliver copies of motions and
responses to the division.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
07/10/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
FILED: 07/11/2006
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Berry’s
response.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Defendant Berry’s motion for additional time to file her
response to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff may file a reply within 10 days
thereafter. Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s request for summary disposition of
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
The court notes that Plaintiff’s motions and other original papers submitted to the court
have been printed in a proportional font with a size smaller than thirteen point, in violation of
Rule 2.17, Local Rules of Maricopa County. Plaintiff is advised that the court shall decline to
read future filings unless there is compliance with the rule.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
07/26/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
FILED: 07/31/2006
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
LEADER MORTGAGE COMPANY,
THE
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM, STATUT
3225 N CENTRAL AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85012
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: SINGLE FAMILY NOTES BRAN
451 SEVENTH ST, SW
WASHINGTON DC 20410
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received Defendant Renee Berry’s Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff’s
Response. No reply has been received within the time permitted. No oral argument has been
requested.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING Defendant Renee Berry’s Motion to Dismiss.
Of all the issues attempted to be raised in the motion, the one issue that is not clear is
Plaintiff’s status as a corporation or not. The caption of the complaint indicated that Plaintiff is
an Arizona non-profit corporation. Paragraph two of the complaint alleges that, Plaintiff is a

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
07/26/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
non-profit corporation and a homeowner’s association. Defendant argues that Plaintiff is no
longer a corporation. Plaintiff’s response argues that Plaintiff’s status is not relevant.
While Plaintiff’s status is not relevant to whether Defendant is indebted, it is relevant as
to who is the proper party.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DIRECTING Plaintiff to file a motion to amend caption
and complaint to reflect the actual status of the Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall file the motion to amend
within twenty (20) days of this minute entry. If no motion to amend is filed, the complaint shall
be dismissed.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/05/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/04/2006
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s
Response. No reply has been filed. Oral argument has been requested.
The court notes oral argument has been requested. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(c)(2), Arizona
Rules of Civil Procedure, the court determines that, in order to expedite its business, this matter
shall be decided without oral argument. The court is fully informed of the issues.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
In Defendant’s response it is argued that Defendant never received notices that the
charges were incurred. Defendant also argues that the charges are not reasonable.
The court concludes from the lack of a reply from Plaintiff that Plaintiff concedes that
these are fact questions for a jury to resolve.
This ruling makes moot all other pending motions.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/16/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/13/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
MARK E LINES
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
LEADER MORTGAGE COMPANY,
THE
C T CORPORATION SYSTEM, STATUT
3225 N CENTRAL AVE
PHOENIX AZ 85012
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: SINGLE FAMILY NOTES BRAN
451 SEVENTH ST, SW
WASHINGTON DC 20410
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s Rule 38.1 Motion to Set and Certificate
of Readiness.
IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall submit a Joint Pretrial Memorandum as set forth
below.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/13/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
The court will review the Joint Pretrial Memorandum and proposed discovery and
disclosure order, required below. If the dates are mutually agreeable to all parties, then the
parties may incorporate the order by reference. The court may set a trial date and a trial
management conference date upon receipt of the Joint Pretrial Memorandum. The court may
also adopt the discovery and disclosure schedule order and set a scheduling conference after the
completion of the disclosures. Or the court may place the matter back on the Inactive Calendar
for a period of time for counsel to complete the requirements under Rule 38.1¹. If counsel feel a
pretrial conference is still necessary at this stage of the litigation, they should address the reasons
for the need for a pretrial conference in the first paragraph of the Joint Pretrial Memorandum.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:
All counsel are directed to meet personally to discuss all of the matters set forth in Rule
16(b). Counsel shall prepare and file with the court by 5:00 p.m. on November 10, 2006, a
Joint Pretrial Memorandum, and prepare a proposed order for Discovery and Disclosure
deadlines. The memorandum shall address all the matters listed in Rule 16(b) and additional
items set forth below. The proposed order shall include specific dates for the following items
and conform substantially with the attached sample order.
1.
The nature of the case; the issues, and each party’s position with respect to the
issues.
2.
An agreed upon schedule and date for completion of non-expert depositions.
As far as can reasonably be anticipated, each party shall set forth the depositions
they anticipate taking and the approximate time required for each; any and all
medical examinations which may be required of any of the parties; the person or
persons to conduct such examinations; all requests for production; and all tangible
evidence to be disclosed or exchanged.
3.
A date for the final disclosure of the identities, subject matters, and reports of
expert witnesses, and/or to supplement disclosures made to date.
4.
A date or dates for the initial and final disclosure of all non-expert witnesses,
and/or to supplement disclosures made to date.
5.
A date by which all written discovery will be propounded and concluded.
Further, counsel shall set forth any written discovery outstanding and a date when it
will be complete.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/13/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 3
6.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 time limits should be
waived.
7.
The court shall order the parties to participate either in a settlement conference with
a judge pro tem or a mediation with a private mediator. An agreement of all parties
is required for private mediation. The parties are to advise if such an agreement is
reached. The parties are also to advise a proposed date for the completion of the
settlement conference or mediation.
8.
Set forth any discovery disputes to date or Rule 26.1 compliance issues.
9.
A date for completion of all discovery, including expert discovery.
10.
A date by which all dispositive or partially-dispositive motions shall be filed.
11.
A proposed trial date agreed upon by all counsel and anticipated length of trial.
If the parties agree as to the dates, they need to only prepare the proposed order, and
incorporate it by reference. If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items of the Pretrial
Memorandum, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Pretrial
Memorandum and each shall prepare a separate proposed order. All proposed deadlines shall
be set forth as calendar dates, and not in the form “XX days before trial.”
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall notify the court of any agreed-upon
extension of any time period provided by the Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of this order
is not to discourage extensions as a matter of professionalism, but to ensure that no party suffers
summary disposition of any issue by virtue of an extension of which the court is not aware.
Counsel are reminded that the court may impose sanctions, pursuant to Rule 16(f),
against counsel and/or their clients for failure to participate in good faith in the preparation or
timely filing of the memorandum.
¹ The court will strictly enforce Rule 38.1(a)(3)(1) and Local Rule 3.4.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/13/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 4
The Court having received the parties’ Joint Comprehensive Pretrial Conference
Memorandum,
IT IS ORDERED entering the following schedule for disclosure as set forth unless the
parties obtain written modifications by the Court:
(1)
Initial disclosures shall be exchanged by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(2)
The identities and subject areas of all expert testimony shall be disclosed by:
(MM/DD/YYYY)
(3)
Plaintiff’s final expert testimony shall be disclosed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
Defendant’s final expert testimony shall be disclosed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
Rebuttal expert testimony shall be disclosed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
OR
The parties’ simultaneous final expert opinions shall be disclosed by:
(MM/DD/YYYY)
The parties’ simultaneous rebuttal expert opinions shall be disclosed by:
(MM/DD/YYYY)
(4)
Final Non-expert disclosures shall be exchanged by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(5)
Written discovery shall be propounded by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(6)
Dispositive Motions shall be filed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(7)
Depositions shall be completed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(8)
Discovery shall be completed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(9)
Any motions to amend pleadings shall be filed by: (MM/DD/YYYY)
(10)
The parties remaining in this action shall complete mediation or a settlement
conference by (MM/DD/YYYY).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
10/13/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 5
IT IS ORDERED setting Status Conference in this matter on [counsel to leave this date
blank], 2006 at * a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes), in this Division.
HON. BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
Judge of Superior Court of Arizona
125 W. Washington - OCH
Courtroom 103 – 1st Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-3351
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in no less than five days prior to the Status Conference
set herein, the parties shall submit a joint memorandum supplementing the previous joint
memorandum and reporting the history and status of the efforts at Alternative Dispute Resolution
pursuant to ARCP Rule 16(g).

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/08/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
11/07/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received Plaintiff’s Objection to Court’s October 4, 2006 Minute Entry
Order and Findings. No response to the objection has been received.
IT IS ORDERED VACATING the court’s Minute Entry of October 4, 2006.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff until November 22, 2006 to file a
reply.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/04/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
11/30/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has now reviewed the Reply in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment,
together with the motion and the response. Oral argument has been requested.
The court notes oral argument has been requested. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(c)(2), Arizona
Rules of Civil Procedure, the court determines that, in order to expedite its business, this matter
shall be decided without oral argument. The court is fully informed of the issues.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
The court agrees with Plaintiff that Defendant has failed to come forward with any
colorable defense to Plaintiff’s claim.
As to Defendant’s concern that Plaintiff’s counsel was unreasonable, the court notes that
Defendant will have an opportunity to raise this argument in response to Plaintiff’s application
for attorney’s fees.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
11/30/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall lodge a proposed judgment,
application for attorney’s fees (if applicable), and statement of costs in accordance with
applicable statutes and rules within ten (10) days of the filing of this minute entry.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/25/2006 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2005-015308
12/22/2006
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BARRY C. SCHNEIDER
W. Yank
Deputy
NORTH CANYON RANCH OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
AUGUSTUS H SHAW IV
v.
RENEE A BERRY, et al.
RENEE A BERRY
4005 W AVENIDA DEL SOL
GLENDALE AZ 85310
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received Defendant Renee A. Berry’s Motion for Reconsideration. The
gist of the motion is that Defendant did not receive the Motion for Summary Judgment. The
Defendant did, however, file a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment. The response
was considered by the court.
IT IS ORDERED DENYING Defendant Renee A. Berry’s Motion for Reconsideration.

Documents