Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2008-001893: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Regency House Association.

Case Number

CV2008-001893

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

1/25/2008

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Pineda, Susanna

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/01/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
03/30/2009
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
LINDA JONES
P O BOX 5740
PHOENIX AZ 85034
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
STATUS CONFERENCE
STATUS CONFERENCE SET
9:09 a.m. (In Chambers) This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff
is represented by counsel Sara Powell. Defendant Regency is represented by counsel Walter
Grochowski. Defendant Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. is represented by counsel Robert
McKenzie.
Court reporter, Michael Babicky, is present.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that although Plaintiff’s counsel Sara Powell has been
permitted to withdraw, she is representing Plaintifff at this hearing.
The case status is discussed. Counsel advise the Court that they are finalizing details of a
settlement agreement.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
03/30/2009
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Status Conference for June 22, 2009 at 10:00
a.m., with Plaintiff to initiate call to this Division, telephone number 602-506-2139.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 3 days prior to the Status Conference, the parties
shall submit a written Joint Notice of Statement of the Case indicating the following:
•
The status of the case;
•
Compliance with the Court’s deadlines,
•
Issue(s) that they have resolved; and
•
Any problems or motions to address.
Suggestions to conference call attendees calling from outside the court system:
•
Do not use a speaker phone.
•
Do not use a cell phone. If possible, use a desk phone.
•
Avoid noisy areas.
•
Mute phone when not speaking.
•
State your name every time you address the Court.
Counsel are advised that the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to resolve this case in
a just, speedy, and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1, Ariz.R.Civ.P.
With respect to discovery disputes, counsel are also advised that, as the Court interprets
Civil Rule 37(a)(2)(c), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in extraordinary
circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other by telephone to attempt to
resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the Court.
9:12 a.m. Conference concludes.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/01/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
03/31/2009
Docket Code 025
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
LINDA JONES
P O BOX 5740
PHOENIX AZ 85034
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
CASE STATUS MINUTE ENTRY
STATUS CONFERENCE AFFIRMED
The Court having received the Motion to Withdraw from counsel Sara Powell, counsel
for Linda Jones.
IT IS ORDERED affirming the telephonic Status Conference set for March 30, 2009 at
9:00 a.m., with Plaintiff to initiate call to this Division, telephone number 602-506-2139.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 3 days prior to the Status Conference, the parties
shall submit a written Joint Notice of Statement of the Case indicating the following:
•
The status of the case;
•
Compliance with the Court’s deadlines,
•
Issue(s) that they have resolved; and
•
Any problems or motions to address.
Suggestions to conference call attendees calling from outside the court system:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
03/31/2009
Docket Code 025
Form V000A
Page 2
•
Do not use a speaker phone.
•
Do not use a cell phone. If possible, use a desk phone.
•
Avoid noisy areas.
•
Mute phone when not speaking.
•
State your name every time you address the Court.
Counsel are advised that the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to resolve this case in
a just, speedy, and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1, Ariz.R.Civ.P.
With respect to discovery disputes, counsel are also advised that, as the Court interprets
Civil Rule 37(a)(2)(c), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in extraordinary
circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other by telephone to attempt to
resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the Court.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/08/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/04/2008
Docket Code 066
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Sahli
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
JUDGE HICKS
JUDGE HYATT
CASE REASSIGNMENT - CIVIL PRESIDING JUDGE
This case was previously assigned to the Honorable Carey Hyatt. A Notice of Change of
Judge has been filed by Defendant. The case was transferred to the Presiding Civil Judge for
reassignment.
IT IS ORDERED that this case be assigned to Civil Calendar CVJ12, the Honorable
Bethany Hicks, for all further proceedings. If any objections to the Notice of Change of Judge
are filed, the noticed judge retains jurisdiction to hear and decide the objections. Any objections
must be filed and a copy delivered to the noticed judge within twenty days of the date of this
order.
Pending:
⋅Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/11/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/10/2008
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
This matter having been reassigned to Judge Hicks,
IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument for May 13, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. in this division on
the following motion:
•
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
Judge BETHANY G. HICKS
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 811
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-2139
Counsel’s arguments are limited to five (5) minutes per side. If additional time is requested,
counsel shall contact the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/10/2008
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
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.
If the parties’ Motions contain citations to out-of-state cases, that party shall
provide the Court with copies of those cases.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/17/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/16/2008
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
ORAL ARGUMENT RESET
Pursuant to oral stipulation of counsel,
IT IS ORDERED resetting Oral Argument from May 13, 2008 to May 21, 2008 at 11:00
a.m. in this division on the following motion:
•
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
Judge BETHANY G. HICKS
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 811
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-2139
Counsel’s arguments are limited to five (5) minutes per side. If additional time is requested,
counsel shall contact the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/16/2008
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 2
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.
If the parties’ Motions contain citations to out-of-state cases, that party shall
provide the Court with copies of those cases.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/17/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
04/16/2009
Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
ROBERT MACKENZIE
DISMISSAL
STATUS CONFERENCE VACATED
IT IS ORDERED approving the formal, written Order for Dismissal with Prejudice,
signed by the Court on April 14, 2009 and filed (entered) by the clerk April 15, 2009.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Status Conference set for June 22, 2009 at
10:00 a.m.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
05/28/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
05/21/2008
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
ORAL ARGUMENT
MOTION TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT
11:00 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Defendant Securitas Security
Services USA Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff is represented by counsel Sara Powell.
Defendant Securitas Security USA, Inc. is represented by counsel Robert Mackenzie.
Defendant Regency House Association is represented by counsel Walter Grochowski.
Court reporter, Michael Babicky, is present.
Oral argument having been presented,
IT IS ORDERED taking the following motion under advisement:
•
Defendant Securitas Security Services USA Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss
11:24 a.m. Hearing concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
06/16/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
06/12/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
RULING ON MATTER TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT
The Court has under advisement the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
After consideration of the pleadings and oral argument of counsel,
IT IS ORDERED denying the motion.
Motions to Dismiss are disfavored in the pleading stage. These parties have not had the
opportunity to fully discover all the facts pertinent to this action. This motion should not be
granted unless the Plaintiff could not recover under any set of circumstances.
Determination of whether a duty exists is a question for the Court, however, the Court
has identified, at a minimum, the following issues and facts that need to be developed:
1) Whether the contract between Securitas and Regency created a duty between Securitas
and Jones. (Professional Sports v. Gillette Security, 159 Ariz. 218).
2) Whether Securitas undertook the duty Regency owed to Jones as described by §324A of
the Rest. Second of Torts.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
06/12/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
3) If the scope of Securitas duty to Regency and to third parties was expanded by the
patrolling of Securitas guards outside Regency grounds.
*Also the Court still requests a more readable version of the contract between Securitas and
Regency.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
08/06/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
08/05/2008
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Regency House’s Reply in Support of Motion for
Leave to File Cross-Claim Against Defendant Securitas Security Services.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument for September 2, 2008 at 10:00
a.m. in this division on the following motion:
•
Defendant Regency House’s Cross-Claim against Defendant Securitas Security Services
Judge BETHANY G. HICKS
Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 811
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-2139
Counsel’s arguments are limited to five (5) minutes per side. If additional time is requested,
counsel shall contact the Court.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
08/05/2008
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
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.
If the parties’ Motions contain citations to out-of-state cases, that party shall
provide the Court with copies of those cases.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/05/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
09/02/2008
Docket Code 002
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
HEARING VACATED
IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Regency House’s Notice of Withdrawal of its
Motion for Leave to File Cross-Claim Against Defendant Securitas Security Services, and
Request to Vacate Hearing of September 2, 2008.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
09/09/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
09/05/2008
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SET

The Court having received Plaintiff’s Request for Rule 16 Scheduling Conference,
IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Comprehensive Pre-Trial Conference for
October 23, 2008 at 1:30 p.m., with Plaintiff to initiate call to this Division, telephone number
602-506-2139.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit a Joint Pretrial Memorandum
as set forth below.
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 at that time. The Court may also adopt the discovery and
disclosure schedule order and set a scheduling conference after the completion of 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

1 The Court will strictly enforce Rule 38.1(a)(3)(I) and Local Rule 3.4.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
09/05/2008
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2
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.
If the parties fail to file a timely memorandum, sanctions may issue pursuant to Rule
16(f).
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, 5 days prior to the Pre-Trial Conference, a
Joint Pretrial Memorandum, and prepare a proposed order for Discovery and Disclosure
deadlines with dates certain. The proposed order shall include dates certain for the following
items.
The proposed order shall include dates for the following items.
1.
An agreed-upon schedule 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.
2.
A date for the final disclosure of expert witnesses, and/or to supplement
disclosures made to date.
3.
A date or dates for the final disclosure of all non-expert witnesses, and/or to
supplement disclosures made to date.
4.
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.
5.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 time limits should be
waived.
6.
A proposed date for a Mandatory Settlement Conference pursuant to Rule 16.1
A.R.C.P.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
09/05/2008
Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 3
7.
An agreed-upon date for compliance with Rule 16(d). The parties shall attach a
copy of the Rule 16(g) form so the Court can issue the appropriate order for
Alternate Dispute Resolution.
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 only prepare the proposed order and
incorporate it by reference. If counsel are unable to agree on any of the items of the Pretrial
Statement, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in the Pretrial Statement and
each shall prepare a separate proposed order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should any discovery disputes arise, counsel shall
MEET AND CONFER pursuant to Rule 37, then telephonically contact the Court to set up a
telephonic conference before any motions are filed.
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.
Any dispositive motions must be filed within 90 days of trial. Any motions in limine must
be filed within 30 days of trial.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/28/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
10/23/2008
Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
STATUS CONFERENCE SET
1:30 p.m. (In Chambers) This is the time set for a telephonic Pretrial Scheduling
Conference. Plaintiff is represented by counsel Sara J. Powell. Defendant Regency House
Association is represented by counsel Walter Grochowski. Defendant Securitas Security is
represented by counsel Robert Mackenzie.
Court reporter, Michael Babicky, is present.
The case status is discussed.
IT IS ORDERED adopting as the Court’s orders the discovery deadlines as set forth in
the Joint Pretrial Memorandum filed October 16, 2008.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that dispositive motions will be due by July 1, 2009.
LET THE RECORD FURTHER REFLECT that counsel can expect this matter to go
to trial in October 2009.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
10/23/2008
Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 2
IT IS ORDERED that mediation be completed by July 15, 2009. All parties concerned
with this lawsuit, counsel and those with authority on behalf of the parties must PERSONALLY
appear at the settlement conference and participate in good faith, unless the mediator, in his
discretion, allows a telephonic appearance.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a telephonic Status Conference for December 29,
2008 at 9:45 a.m., with Plaintiff to initiate call to this Division, telephone number 602-506-
2139.
Suggestions to conference call attendees calling from outside the court system:
•
Do not use a speaker phone.
•
Do not use a cell phone. If possible, use a desk phone.
•
Avoid noisy areas.
•
Mute phone when not speaking.
•
State your name every time you address the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 3 days prior to the Status Conference, the parties
shall submit a written Joint Notice of Statement of the Case indicating the following:
•
The status of the case;
•
Compliance with the Court’s deadlines,
•
Issue(s) that they have resolved; and
•
Any problems or motions to address.
Counsel are advised that the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to resolve this case in
a just, speedy, and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1, Ariz.R.Civ.P.
With respect to discovery disputes, counsel are also advised that, as the Court interprets
Civil Rule 37(a)(2)(c), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in extraordinary
circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other by telephone to attempt to
resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the Court.
1:33 p.m. Conference concludes.
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/02/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
12/29/2008
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE BETHANY G. HICKS
D. Whitford
Deputy
LINDA JONES
SARA J POWELL
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES U S A INC,
et al.
ROBERT MACKENZIE
WALTER GROCHOWSKI
STATUS CONFERENCE
STATUS CONFERENCE SET
9:47 a.m. (In Chambers) This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Plaintiff
is represented by counsel Sara Powell. Defendant Regency House Association is represented by
counsel Walter Grochowski. Defendant Securitas Security is represented by counsel Robert
Mackenzie.
Court reporter, Michael Babicky, is present.
The case status is discussed.
•
The parties are trying to resolve the issue that Plaintiff has re: Defendant’s
Responses to Discovery.
•
The parties have a mediation deadline of July 15, 2009.
IT IS ORDERED that counsel confer and select a mediator and contact that mediator
within 20 days from this hearing to schedule mediation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties concerned with this lawsuit, counsel and
those with authority to settle the case on behalf of the parties, including insurance adjustors

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
12/29/2008
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2
and any excess insurance carriers, must PERSONALLY appear at the settlement conference
and participate in good faith, unless the mediator, in his discretion, allows a telephonic
appearance.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Workers’ Compensation Claim representatives
must be present at the Settlement Conference. Failure to appear may result in sanctions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a telephonic Status Conference for March 30,
2009 at 9:00 a.m., with Plaintiff to initiate call to this Division, telephone number 602-506-
2139.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 3 days prior to the Status Conference, the parties
shall submit a written Joint Notice of Statement of the Case indicating the following:
•
The status of the case;
•
Compliance with the Court’s deadlines,
•
Issue(s) that they have resolved; and
•
Any problems or motions to address.
Suggestions to conference call attendees calling from outside the court system:
•
Do not use a speaker phone.
•
Do not use a cell phone. If possible, use a desk phone.
•
Avoid noisy areas.
•
Mute phone when not speaking.
•
State your name every time you address the Court.
Counsel are advised that the Court is available to discuss, by joint telephone call,
discovery disputes or any other matter that may impact the parties’ ability to resolve this case in
a just, speedy, and inexpensive manner. See Rule 1, Ariz.R.Civ.P.
With respect to discovery disputes, counsel are also advised that, as the Court interprets
Civil Rule 37(a)(2)(c), an exchange of correspondence between counsel is not sufficient to
satisfy the “personal consultation” requirement of the Rule, except in extraordinary
circumstances. At a minimum, counsel must speak to each other by telephone to attempt to
resolve the dispute in good faith before involving the Court.
9:52 a.m. Conference concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-001893
12/29/2008
Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 3
NOTE: The parties are advised that failure to appear at a hearing may result in sanctions,
including a Default Judgment.

Documents