Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2008-024945: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Saguaro Highlands Community Association.

Case Number

CV2008-024945

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

10/9/2008

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 ***
01/06/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/05/2011
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Timpauer
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
DOUGLAS H ALLSWORTH
COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL
CONFERENCE SETTING
The Court has received and reviewed plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Pretrial Conference
and no objection having been filed, enters the following ruling.
Plaintiff’s request is GRANTED.
IT IS ORDERED vacating
the Comprehensive Pretrial Conference, set for
January 13, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. (15 min.) and resetting same for January 25, 2011, at 8:45 a.m.
(15 min.) before:
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
Judge of Superior Court of Arizona
125 W. Washington - OCH
Courtroom 103 – 1st Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6538

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/05/2011
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2
The parties may appear telephonically. Counsel will need to confer as the court cannot
accept multiple calls. If all parties wish to appear telephonically, Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate
the conference call. The court’s phone number is (602) 506-6538. Transmissions over cellular
telephones and speaker phones are not clearly received by the court’s phone system and,
therefore, are not allowed.
The court will set a firm trial date at this conference. Counsel are advised to have their
trial calendars with them.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit a Joint Pretrial Memorandum
as set forth below.
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 January 18, 2011, a Joint
Pretrial Memorandum. The memorandum shall address all the matters listed in Rule 16(b) and
additional items set forth below.
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 2008-024945
01/05/2011
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 3
6.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 time limits should be
waived.
7.
The court will 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 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. 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 because the court is unaware that an extension had been
granted.
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.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
01/26/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
DOUGLAS H ALLSWORTH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC
JURY TRIAL SETTING
8:46 a.m. In Chambers: This is the time set for Rule 16 Pre-Trial Conference. Plaintiff,
Saguaro Highlands Community Association is telephonically represented by counsel, Mark A.
Holmgren for J. Roger Wood. Defendants, Jack C. Biltis and Leigh Biltis are telephonically
represented by counsel, Douglas H. Allsworth.
No court reporter is present.
Discussion is held regarding case status and future scheduling.
IT IS ORDERED setting the following schedule for disclosure, discovery, and pre-trial
procedures unless the parties obtain written modifications from the Court:
1)
The parties shall simultaneously disclose the identities and subject areas of any
expert witnesses no later than January 15, 2011;
2)
The parties shall simultaneously disclose the opinions and reports of their expert
witnesses no later than February 25, 2011;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2
3)
The parties shall disclose the names of all non-expert witnesses no later than
January 28, 2011;
4)
Written discovery shall be propounded no later than January 28, 2011, and ALL
discovery shall be completed by April 15, 2011;
5)
Dispositive motions shall be filed no later than May 13, 2011;
6)
Motions in Limine shall be filed no later than July 15, 2011; and responded to no
later than August 1, 2011;
7)
The parties shall participate in a mandatory settlement conference. This case is
referred 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 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 May 25, 2011. The
Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the
settlement conference so please do not contact that office. If counsel prefer to use
a private mediator to conduct the settlement conference, a Stipulation and Order
re: Alternative to ADR must be presented to the Court by no later than 5:00 p.m.
on February 9, 2011. All counsel and their clients, or non-lawyer representatives
who have full and complete authority to settle the case, shall personally appear
and participate in good faith in the Settlement Conference. Sanctions may be
imposed for failure to participate.
IT IS ORDERED setting a Status Conference in this matter on June 8, 2011, at

8:45 a.m. (15 min.) in this division. Mediation results shall be discussed. The parties may
appear telephonically. Counsel will need to confer as the Court cannot accept multiple calls. If
all parties wish to appear telephonically, Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate the conference call. The
Court’s phone number is (602) 506-6538. Transmissions over cellular telephones and speaker
phones are not clearly received by the Court’s phone system and, therefore, are not allowed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Final Pre-Trial Conference in this matter on
August 5, 2011, at 11:00 a.m. (30 min.) in this division. Counsel who will try this case shall
appear in person at the Final Pre-Trial Conference.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting this matter for a 2-day Jury Trial for August 15,
20111, at 9:30 a.m. in this division.
THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING
NO CONTINUANCE SHALL BE GRANTED
Trial days are normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that motions in limine shall be filed in accordance with
Rule 7.2 of Civil Procedure and as follows:
A.
Motions in Limine shall be consecutively numbered in the caption identifying the
party filing it and the subject of the motion; e.g. “Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine
No. 1 Re: Defendant’s expert;” or “Defendant’s Motion in Limine No. 1 Re: No
mention of insurance.”
B.
Each motion in limine shall deal with one discrete subject.
C.
DO NOT combine a motion in limine with ANY other motion.
D.
DO NOT file a “cross-motion in limine.”
E.
Label responses to motions in limine by identifying the number and subject of the
motion being responded to; e.g. “Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion in
Limine No. 1 Re: Defendant’s expert.”
F.
DO NOT respond to more than one motion in limine in each response.
A joint pretrial statement (JPTS) prepared in accordance with Rule 16(d) is due 5
judicial days prior to the Final Pre-Trial Conference. The following shall be filed with the
JPTS:
A.
A list of the names of all witnesses who may testify to be read to the jury.
B.
A set of agreed-upon jury instructions with an additional copy on a disk, in
Word format.

1 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 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4
C.
Separate sets of requested instructions that have not been agreed upon
with an additional copy on a disk, in Word format.
D.
Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (if a request for same has
been or will be filed).
E.
A stipulated brief summary of the case, which the court can read at the
outset of voir dire.
All exhibits shall be exchanged 30 days before trial. Counsel shall confer
regarding exhibits so duplicates are avoided and list any stipulations to those
exhibits which can be received in evidence. At least ten days before trial, counsel
or their knowledgeable assistants, shall call the division clerk at (602) 506-3553
to obtain written procedures for marking exhibits. At least one week before trial,
counsel shall submit all exhibits to the clerk of the division for marking. Original
depositions are provided to the clerk for the record and not marked as exhibits.
To facilitate the court’s ability to rule on disclosure objections, on the morning of the first
day of trial, each party shall deliver to the court a copy of all disclosure statements that have
been sent to the other parties. All responses to non-disclosure objections will require the offering
party to state the date, page and line number of the disclosure statement or other place where the
disputed evidence was disclosed.
If discovery issues arise, the parties may file, brief, and set for argument motions to
compel discovery, or at their OPTION may send a one-page letter to the Court describing the
dispute in the first paragraph and proposing a solution in the second paragraph. The opposing
side may respond by letter in 48 hours and the Court will contact counsel by telephone to resolve
the issue. This expedited procedure is strictly OPTIONAL, not MANDATORY.
8:52 a.m. Matter concludes.
TRIAL MANAGEMENT ORDER
PURPOSE: These trial procedures are designed to enhance jury comprehension of the
facts and issues; to assist counsel in making the maximum, effective use of their trial time; and to
assure the “just, speedy and inexpensive determination” of the parties’ dispute.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5
IT IS ORDERED:
1.
Voir dire. Counsel may conduct a limited and reasonable examination of the
panel following the Court’s questioning. In the normal case, 15 to 20 minutes is reasonable.
Jury “conditioning” will not be allowed. Use of “mini-openings” before voir dire in lieu of a
brief statement of the case will be discussed with counsel at the pretrial management conference.
Submission of proposed voir dire instructions to the court is NOT required.
2.
Time allocations. The Court may make tentative, reasonable, presumptive time
allocations for each side. If so, your time will be charged when you have the floor, e.g., voir
dire, opening statement, direct examination, cross-examination, closing argument and lost time
caused by failure to have witnesses available. You will be regularly informed of time used and
time remaining. As this case proceeds, the court will consider the necessity of imposing
presumptive time limits on the parties.
3.
Notification of order of proof. Each side shall notify the other on a “rolling”
forty-eight hours’ basis of the order in which witnesses will be called. From time to time,
counsel may be asked to inform the jury of their order of proof. (Witnesses may be scheduled
out of order on agreement of counsel or, if necessary, by order of Court.)
4.
Absent witnesses. The Court encourages the use of brief, agreed-upon deposition
summaries. If the deposition was videotaped, the Court encourages use of a brief, edited extract
of pertinent portions of the deposition. Videoconferencing may be arranged at the offering
party’s expense.
5.
Bench conferences are discouraged. They interrupt the trial, show a certain
rudeness in excluding the jury and do not fool the jurors, who understand that someone is trying
to keep information from them. If counsel wishes to be heard on an objection outside the
presence of the jury, he or she need merely indicate such, and the Court will direct inquiring
counsel to move to another subject. The matter will be considered at the next available recess.
One exception is jury questions. Counsel may be called to the bench when they are submitted.
6.
Jury questions will be reviewed with counsel and, if appropriate, answered at the
first available opportunity.
7.
Introduction of witnesses. If counsel wish, they may introduce each witness to
the jury after the witness is sworn and before the witness begins his or her testimony. An
introduction might include the witness’ name and occupation and a brief summary of the
witness’s proposed testimony. Alternatively, the Court will not sustain an objection to an
opening question such as, “Please tell the jury who you are and why you are here.”

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6
8.
Expert opinions. Counsel are strongly encouraged to elicit the expert’s opinion at
the earliest, available opportunity. The hypothetical question has been abolished, and the
witness’ qualifications should have been established before trial. In the first two to five minutes,
the jury should know who the witness is and why the witness is present.
9.
Expert witnesses’ resumes (brief and descriptive) will be admitted over a hearsay
objection. Questions of length and content will be resolved before trial.
10.
Objections shall be stated succinctly and clearly without extended comment or
argument. The Court will supply the jury with a glossary of terms, which includes a definition of
some common objections, at the time the Court reads the preliminary instructions. A copy of the
glossary is attached.
11.
Permission to approach and/or publish. Counsel need not ask the Court’s
permission to approach the clerk or a witness, nor need counsel ask the Court’s permission to
publish or pass an exhibit which has been received in evidence to the jury.
12.
Interim commentaries. In cases scheduled for more than 5 court days, counsel
may request the opportunity to give 5 minute interim commentaries each week as the case
progresses. Commentaries will consist of statements of fact as to evidence presented or to be
presented and will not contain argument.
13.
Microphones. Because of the acoustics of our courtroom, it is often difficult to
hear a speaker. For the benefit of the jurors and court staff, it is appreciated if all speakers use
the assistance of a microphone, whether at the podium or the attorney tables. A microphone is
also provided for witnesses.
14.
Technology. Counsel are encouraged to make maximum, effective use of the
many forms of trial and courtroom technology which are available. Counsel should ensure that
the technology is appropriately set up and working properly before its use is attempted in court.
15.
Daily schedule. A trial day is from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., with lunch usually
from noon until 1:30 p.m., one fifteen-minute break in the morning and one in the afternoon.
16.
Trial interruptions. Trial will not be interrupted for discussion of legal matters.
The Court is available daily before and after trial and during regular recesses to consider such
matters.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
01/25/2011
Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7
Glossary: (to be supplied to the jurors)
Some Words and Phrases You May Hear
During the trial, you may hear these words or phrases:
“Deposition.” A deposition is the testimony of a witness taken before trial. The witness is
placed under oath, and the lawyers may ask questions. The questions and answers are recorded.
“Disclosure.” Our rules require the parties to exchange certain information before trial. An
objection of “non-disclosure” is a claim that the other party has not disclosed the information before
trial.
“Discovery.” Discovery is another way the parties may obtain information from other
parties or third persons before trial. Depositions and interrogatories are examples of discovery.
“Foundation.” An objection to lack of foundation is a claim that more preliminary
information is needed before a question can be answered or a document admitted into evidence.
“Hearsay.” Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the contents of
the statement. Hearsay is generally not admissible. There are many exceptions to the hearsay rule,
and some out-of-court statements are not hearsay.
“Interrogatory.” An interrogatory is a written question submitted before trial to a party or
witness to be answered under oath.
“Leading.” A leading question is one which suggests the answer. The law prefers the
answer to come from the witness’s own knowledge and words. Leading questions are sometimes
allowed; examples are cross-examination of an opposing party or hostile witness, preliminary
questions and questions about technical subjects.
“Rule____.” Proceedings in court are governed by rules of evidence and rules of procedure.
A lawyer may cite a specific rule in arguing for or against an objection.
“Voir dire.” This French phrase means “to tell the truth.” It describes a preliminary
examination of a witness or juror sworn to tell the truth. Jury selection is often referred to as “voir
dire.” An opposing lawyer may ask to “voir dire” a witness to ask questions about a document or
testimony the witness is about to offer.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/20/2009 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
02/19/2009
Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
MARTIN F DEINHART
MINUTE ENTRY
IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Judgment denying Defendants’
Application To Compel Arbitration signed by the court on February 13, 2009, and filed by the
clerk on February 19, 2009.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
04/01/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
03/31/2011
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
DOUGLAS H ALLSWORTH
STATUS CONFERENCE RESET
On the court’s own motion,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the Status Conference regarding mediation results set on
June 8, 2011, and resetting same on July 6, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. (15 min.) in this division.
HONORABLE EDWARD O. BURKE
OLD COURT HOUSE
1st FLOOR, COURTROOM 103
125 WEST WASHINGTON STREET
PHOENIX AZ 85003
602-506-6538 TEL
The parties may appear telephonically. Counsel will need to confer as the Court cannot
accept multiple calls. If all parties wish to appear telephonically, Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate
the conference call. The Court’s phone number is (602) 506-6538. Transmissions over cellular
telephones and speaker phones are not clearly received by the Court’s phone system and,
therefore, are not allowed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
03/31/2011
Docket Code 003
Form V000A
Page 2
If discovery issues arise, the parties may file, brief, and set for argument motions to
compel discovery, or at their OPTION may send a one-page letter to the Court describing the
dispute in the first paragraph and proposing a solution in the second paragraph. The opposing
side may respond by letter in 48 hours and the Court will contact counsel by telephone to resolve
the issue. This expedited procedure is strictly OPTIONAL, not MANDATORY.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/25/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2008-024945

05/15/2018

Docket Code LED
Form EXHCVREL
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
EXHIBITS UNIT
J. Baldon (Exh)

Deputy

SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD

v.

JACK C BILTIS, et al.
MARTIN F DEINHART

NOTICE REGARDING DISPOSITION OF EXHIBITS

The Clerk of the Superior Court is in possession of exhibits in the above captioned case.
This case has been reviewed pursuant to Rules of Court Criminal Procedure, Rule 28.1; Superior
Court - Local Rules of Maricopa County, Rule 2.8(d); Rules of Civil Appellate Procedures, Rule
11(a)(6); and is not subject to further modification.

The exhibits should be claimed at the South Court Tower, Exhibits, 175 W. Madison, 4th
Fl., Phoenix AZ 85003, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
If the exhibits need to be retained, a request must be made in writing within ten (10) days of the
mailing of this notice.

The subject exhibits will not be eligible for release until 6/11/2018 and must be collected
by 7/26/2018 or the exhibits shall be disposed. The following party(ies) have exhibits that need
to be collected: Plaintiff and Defendant. Exhibits may only be released to the party which
presented the exhibits. For further verification please contact the Exhibits Unit at 602-372-2284.

This notice serves as the only written notification regarding disposition of these exhibits.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
07/07/2011 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
07/06/2011
Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE ARTHUR T. ANDERSON
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
DOUGLAS H ALLSWORTH
MINUTE ENTRY
The Court has received and reviewed the parties’ Stipulation to Entry of Injunction and
Order thereto and issues the following ruling.
The parties’ request is GRANTED all in accordance with the formal written Order signed
by the Court on July 6, 2011, and filed by the Clerk on July 6, 2011.
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED vacating the Status Conference set on July 6, 2011, in this division.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing cause CV2008-024945 with prejudice in its
entirety.
ALERT: eFiling through AZTurboCourt.gov is mandatory in civil cases for attorney-
filed documents effective May 1, 2011. See Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Orders
2010-117 and 2011-010. The Court may impose sanctions against counsel to ensure compliance
with this requirement after May 1, 2011.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/07/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
11/05/2008
Docket Code 530
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Muhammad
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
COURT ADMIN-CIVIL-ARB DESK
DEPUTY CT ADMINISTRATOR,
COURTWIDE SERVICES
DOCKET-CIVIL-CCC
E-FILE CASE MANAGEMENT
FILE ROOM-CSC
CASE DESIGNATED FOR PARTICIPATION
IN THE COURT'S E-FILING PROGRAM
The Superior Court is transitioning civil cases to an electronic filing system. Pursuant to
Administrative Order 2007-140,
IT IS ORDERED that all pleadings in this case be electronically filed.
The electronic filing system is currently available for use and mandatory eFiling will
commence on November 24, 2008. Filing by conventional means may continue until this
mandatory date. ALL FILINGS NOT EFILED AFTER THE MANDATORY DATE WILL
NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THE DIVISION UNTIL PROPERLY EFILED. If service has not
yet been completed as to some or all of the Defendants, then it is the Plaintiff's responsibility to
forward this minute entry to later appearing parties.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
11/05/2008
Docket Code 530
Form V000A
Page 2
You may now choose to use the Clerk of Court hosted eFiling system, or one of the
Court's qualified eFiling service providers to electronically file your pleadings. Please visit the
following web site for more information on your options for eFiling.
http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov
To assist in the transition to eFiling, the Office of the Clerk of the Superior Court has
prepared instruction and training concerning the eFiling system. All parties and attorneys of
record in this case are strongly encouraged to study this material before the mandatory eFiling
date. The web site address for training materials is:
http://eventures.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/training.asp
Additionally, please be sure to review the eFiling Guidelines set forth by Administrative
Order 2007-140 at the following web site address:
https://efiling.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efilingguidelines
Upon the mandatory eFiling date, all attorneys of record shall eFile all pleadings in
accordance with the guidelines set forth in Administrative Order 2007-140. Self-represented
parties or pro per litigants, and other case participants like Mediators, Arbitrators, and Special
Discovery Masters are strongly encouraged to eFile all pleadings. If a self-represented party, or
other case participant chooses to file their pleading in paper, they shall include a notation just
under the case number on the first page of the pleading that the case is an “EFILE CASE”.
The eFiling system can be accessed from any computer that has an Internet connection.
Free internet access terminals are available in the Superior Court Law Library, and other public
locations such as most public libraries.
Where filing fees may incur on an electronic filing, they may be paid by credit card at the
time of filing if the filing party choose to use a qualified eFiling service provider. If the filing
party chooses to use the Clerk of Court's hosted eFiling system, the filing party will be contacted
by the Clerk's Office by phone for credit card payment. If we are unable to process payment by
phone, the filing party will be billed by the Billing Unit of the Clerk of Superior Court.
eFiled Orders from the Court will be distributed to attorneys in the same manner each
attorney has elected to receive Minute Entries from the Court. Attorneys may enroll with the
Clerk of the Court to receive their Minute Entries electronically via e-mail. The Minute Entry
Distribution Agreement form may be downloaded at:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
11/05/2008
Docket Code 530
Form V000A
Page 3
http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/forms.asp
NOTE: COUNSEL SHALL UPLOAD AND E-FILE ALL PROPOSED ORDERS IN
WORD FORMAT TO ALLOW FOR POSSIBLE MODIFICATIONS BY THE COURT.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PARTIES SHALL PROVIDE THIS DIVISION WITH HARD
COPIES OF ANY DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS, THE RESPONSES, REPLIES AND ANY
FILED DOCUMENT THAT EXCEEDS 10 PAGES, INCLUDING ANY EXHIBITS AND
ATTACHMENTS.
Motion practice: The movant determines the caption of the filing and all captions on
subsequent related filings shall bear the same designation. For example, the filing of a motion
captioned "Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence" shall result in any
subsequent related filings referring to that title in the caption: "Plaintiff's Response to
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence." No response to a motion shall
contain a separate motion, except in the case of a cross-motion bearing the same designation.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/09/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/05/2008
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
MARTIN F DEINHART
MINUTE ENTRY
Prior to commencement of this Hearing, Plaintiff’s Exhibits 1 through 5 are marked for
identification.
1:34 p.m.
This is the time for Order to Show Cause Evidentiary Hearing. Plaintiff,
Saguaro Highlands Community Association is represented by counsel, Maura A Abernathy.
Defendants, Jack C. Biltis and Leigh Biltis are represented by counsel, Martin F. Deinhart.
Court Reporter, Scott Coniam, is present and a record of the proceedings is made by
audio and/or videotape.
Argument is heard on Defendants’ Application To Compel Arbitration and whether an
Arbitrator is able to issue an Injunction in a case such as this.
The court shall allow the Parties to brief the issue of whether an Arbitrator may issue an
injunction.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/05/2008
Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2
Plaintiff shall submit a response to this by 5:00 p.m. on December 10, 2008, and
Defendant shall file their reply no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 15, 2008. The court shall
enter a ruling on this issue once fully briefed.
The court reminds counsel that they have a responsibility to comply with the Rules of
Civil Procedure in regards to disclosure.
IT IS ORDERED resetting the Evidentiary Hearing on December 24, 2008, at 9:00 a.m.
(15 min.) before:
HONORABLE EDWARD O. BURKE
OLD COURT HOUSE
1st FLOOR, COURTROOM 101
125 WEST WASHINGTON STREET
PHOENIX AZ 85003
602-506-6538 TEL
2:25 p.m. Hearing concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/14/2010 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/10/2010
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
A. Melchert
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
DOUGLAS H ALLSWORTH
COMPREHENSIVE PRETRIAL
CONFERENCE SETTING
The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s Request for Scheduling Order.
IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for a Comprehensive Pretrial Conference, pursuant to
Rule 16(b) on January 13, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. (15 min.) before:
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
Judge of Superior Court of Arizona
125 W. Washington - OCH
Courtroom 103 – 1st Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 506-6538
The parties may appear telephonically. Counsel will need to confer as the court cannot
accept multiple calls. If all parties wish to appear telephonically, Plaintiff’s counsel shall initiate
the conference call. The court’s phone number is (602) 506-6538. Transmissions over cellular
telephones and speaker phones are not clearly received by the court’s phone system and,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/10/2010
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 2
therefore, are not allowed.
The court will set a firm trial date at this conference. Counsel are advised to have their
trial calendars with them.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit a Joint Pretrial Memorandum as
set forth below.
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 January 6, 2011, a Joint
Pretrial Memorandum. The memorandum shall address all the matters listed in Rule 16(b) and
additional items set forth below.
The nature of the case; the issues, and each party’s position with respect to the
1.
issues.
An agreed upon schedule and date for completion of non-expert depositions.
2.
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.
A date for the final disclosure of the identities, subject matters, and reports of
3.
expert witnesses, and/or to supplement disclosures made to date.
A date or dates for the initial and final disclosure of all non-expert witnesses,
4.
and/or to supplement disclosures made to date.
A date by which all written discovery will be propounded and concluded.
5.
Further, counsel shall set forth any written discovery outstanding and a date when it
will be complete.
The position of each counsel on whether the Rule 38.1 time limits should be waived.
6.
The court will order the parties to participate either in a settlement conference with a
7.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/10/2010
Docket Code 026
Form V000A
Page 3
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.
Set forth any discovery disputes to date or Rule 26.1 compliance issues.
8.
A date for completion of all discovery, including expert discovery.
9.
A date by which all dispositive or partially-dispositive motions shall be filed.
10.
A proposed trial date agreed upon by all counsel and anticipated length of trial.
11.
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. 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 because the court is unaware that an extension had been
granted.
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.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/23/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/22/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
J ROGER WOOD
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
MARTIN F DEINHART
MINUTE ENTRY
The court has received and reviewed the parties’ memoranda on the issue of Defendants’
right to compel arbitration on Plaintiff’s complaint against them and enters the following ruling.
Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration is DENIED.
The interpretation of a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions is a
question of law for the court. Johnson v. Pointe Community Ass’n, Inc., 205 Ariz. 485, 490, 73
P.3d 616 (App. 2003). “Restrictive covenants should be interpreted to give effect to the intention
of the parties as determined from the language of the document in its entirety and the purpose for
which the covenants were executed.” Powell v. Washburn, 211 Ariz. 553, 554, 125 P.3d 373
(2006).
Upon reflection and a complete review of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions for Saguaro Highlands (the “CC&Rs”), the court has concluded that the intent of the
drafter was that Article 10 required arbitration of disputes between the homeowners, their
association and/or the association’s board and the original declarant and developers as to the
quality of construction of improvements and its compliance with building codes and good
construction and development practices. The arbitration clause was not intended to apply to

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/22/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
disputes between the association and individual homeowners concerning payment of fees and
construction of improvements by homeowners which may violate the CC&Rs. See Art. 5.13 and
6.10,5.
Article 9.1 grants the association the right to enforce the project documents in any
manner provided by law or in equity, including an action to obtain an injunction to compel
removal of any improvements or to otherwise compel compliance with the project documents.
The CC&Rs grant the association the right to foreclose its lien for dues and assessments,
something that an arbitrator could not order. (Article 6.10,5)
Accordingly, notwithstanding the law’s strong preference for arbitration, the CC&Rs do
not require arbitration of disputes between the association and a homeowner for the removal of
an improvement constructed by a homeowner and the hearing on Plaintiff’s Order to Show
Cause shall take place as scheduled on December 24, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/30/2008 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/24/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. EDWARD O. BURKE
M. Krugman/L. Nixon
Deputy
SAGUARO HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
MAURA A ABERNETHY
v.
JACK C BILTIS, et al.
MARTIN F DEINHART
MINUTE ENTRY
Prior to hearing exhibits 1 through 12, inclusive, are marked for identification.
8:16 a.m. This is the time set for Order to Show Cause Evidentiary Hearing. Plaintiff is
present with counsel, Maura Abernethy for J. Roger Wood. Defendant, Jack C. Biltis, is present
with counsel, Martin F. Deinhart. Nino Pascale, a representative for Saguaro Highlands
Community Association is also present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Discussion is held regarding Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment on Order
Denying Application to Compel Arbitration pursuant to the provisions of Rule 54(b).
IT IS ORDERED Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.
Opening statements are presented.
Plaintiff’s case:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/24/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2
Nino Pascale is sworn and testifies.
Exhibits 1 through 5 are received in evidence.
Nino Pascale continues to testify.
Exhibit 12 is received in evidence.
Nino Pascale testifies further.
Witness is excused.
Plaintiff rests.
Defendant’s case:
Jack C. Biltis is sworn and testifies.
Exhibits 6, 7, 8 and 9 are received in evidence.
Jack C. Biltis continues to testify.
Exhibit 10 is received in evidence with the exclusion of two photographs identified as:
6419 Running Deer and 27582 N. 67th Way.
Jack C. Biltis testifies further.
9:18 a.m. Court is at recess.
9:20 a.m. Court reconvenes with all parties present.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Jack C. Biltis continues to testify.
Witness is excused.
Nino Pascale is recalled and testifies.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2008-024945
12/24/2008
Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3
Discussion is held.
The Court reverses its’ prior ruling,
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment on
Order Denying Application to Compel Arbitration and staying the proceeding pending the
outcome of the appeal process. Defendant’s counsel shall file a proposed form of Final
Judgment by December 26, 2008.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED permanently releasing all exhibits not offered in evidence
to the counsel/party causing them to be marked, or to their written designee.
Defendant’s exhibit # 11 is returned to counsel, Martin Deinhart.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel/party or written designee take immediate
possession of all exhibits referenced above.
9:37 a.m. Hearing concludes.
FILED: Trial/Hearing Worksheet, Exhibit Worksheet
ISSUED: Exhibit Release Form (1)

Documents