Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2014-095508: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Val Vista Lakes Community Association, The.

Case Number

CV2014-095508

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

9/8/2014

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Valenzuela, Michael

Location

Southeast

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/20/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

01/16/2015

Docket Code 375
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 203-SEA

10:00 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference in this case. Counsel,
David E. Johnson, participates on behalf of Plaintiff. Counsel, J. Gary Linder, participates on
behalf of Defendant(s).

This matter comes on in the courtroom off the record.

The Court having been advised that this case has settled,

IT IS ORDERED placing the case on the inactive calendar for dismissal on March 2,
2015. Unless a stipulated judgment or a stipulation for dismissal together with a proposed form
of order is submitted to the Court before that date, all remaining unadjudicated claims will be
dismissed without further notice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating all pending hearings.

10:05 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/04/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

03/03/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

MINUTE ENTRY

On February 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a “Request for Telephonic Status Conference”.
Under the circumstances,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

 Plaintiff’s “Request for Telephonic Status Conference” is denied.

 The “Motion to Dismiss Complaint” filed by Defendant on September 29, 2014 is
denied without prejudice.

 Defendant must file an answer (or otherwise defend as provided by the rules of
civil procedure) by no later than 11 calendar days after this minute entry is
filed by the Clerk of the Court.

ORDER TO FILE JOINT PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER

On Court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

03/03/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

 Counsel and/or the parties are to meet personally to discuss all of the matters set
forth in Rule 16(e), Ariz. R. Civ. P. The parties shall then jointly file with the
Court no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 3, 2015; a document entitled either “Joint
Proposed Scheduling Order” or “Alternative Proposed Scheduling Orders”.

 Any proposed scheduling order must be in the form attached hereto and must at a
minimum address all topics in that form.

 Counsel must upload and e-file all proposed orders in Word format to allow for
possible modification by the Court.

 The Court fully expects, to the extent possible, that the parties will reach
agreement regarding proposed deadlines. If agreement is reached, all that need be
filed is a “Joint Proposed Scheduling Order”.

 If agreement is not reached, the parties must jointly file a document entitled
“Alternative Proposed Scheduling Orders” and attach thereto each party’s
proposed scheduling order, specifying at the top of each attached order who
proposed the order. (Therein, the parties may explain why they have been unable
to reach agreement.)

 If any party feels that a Rule 16 Comprehensive Pretrial Conference is necessary
at this stage of the litigation, in the first paragraph of the party’s “Proposed
Scheduling Order”, the party must request that a conference be set and explain
the reason for the request.
[PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER

The Court having reviewed the parties’ Proposed Scheduling Order(s),

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

 The deadline for service of written discovery requests is 5:00 p.m. on
_____________.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

03/03/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

 The deadlines for disclosure established by Rule 26.1, ARCP (including
the obligation to seasonably supplement prior disclosures) remain in full
force and effect. The deadlines established in this order in no way
supersede the obligation to make earlier disclosure required by Rule 26.1.

 The deadline for disclosure of non-expert witnesses is 5:00 p.m. on
_____________.

 The deadline for disclosure of expert witnesses and their opinions is 5:00
p.m. on _____________.

 The deadline for disclosure of rebuttal expert witnesses and their opinions
is 5:00 p.m. on _____________.

 The deadline for completion of discovery is 5:00 p.m. on _____________.

 The deadline for final supplementation of Rule 26.1 disclosure is 5:00
p.m. on _____________.

 [Private Mediation or Settlement Conference with a judge pro tem (choose
one)]

The parties shall participate in private mediation by 5:00 p.m. on
_____________.

OR

The parties shall participate in a mandatory Settlement Conference by
___________. This case is referred to the Court’s Alternative Dispute
Resolution Office for 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 “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 no later than (propose a
date at least 90 days out). The Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

03/03/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 4

will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not
contact that office.

If the parties decide to use a private mediator, they must forthwith advise
the Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution and any judge pro tempore
who has been assigned to conduct the settlement conference.
Additionally, private mediation must be completed by the deadline
established above.

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/Mediation.
Sanctions may be imposed for failure to participate.

 No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be
used at trial other than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good
cause shown or written agreement of the parties.

 The deadline for filing dispositive or partially dispositive motions is 5:00
p.m. on _____________ or 140 days before trial, whichever comes first.

 A Telephonic Status Conference is set for _____________ at
_____________. Counsel who will be lead counsel at trial must
participate in the Telephonic Status Conference. Counsel must have their
trial calendars available during this conference.

NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by
calling this division at 602-506-5261, with all participating parties and
counsel on the line, at the date and time specified above.

 If mediation or a settlement conference will not be completed before the
above discussed Telephonic Status Conference, counsel must file a Notice
no later than seven days before the conference. In the Notice, counsel
must (1) explain why mediation or a settlement conference has not been
completed and (2) advise of the date on which private mediation or a
settlement conference is scheduled.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

03/03/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 5

 If mediation or a settlement conference has not been completed before the
Telephonic Status Conference, the Court will consider imposing sanctions.

 The deadlines established by this Order are firm and will not be extended
or modified by the Court absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not
ordinarily be considered good cause.

 This case is removed from the Dismissal Calendar and all requirements of
Rule 38.1, ARCP, are waived unless and until otherwise ordered by the
Court.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/09/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

04/08/2015

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

MINUTE ENTRY

The court has received and reviewed the proposed schedule(s) electronically filed on
April 3, 2015.

IT IS ORDERED imposing deadlines and other orders in accordance with the formal
written order signed by the court on April 7, 2015 and entered (filed) by the clerk on April 8,
2015. Because the court may not have adopted all of the proposals of the parties, the parties
should review the court’s signed order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference for October 14,
2015 at 8:45 a.m. before:

HONORABLE ROBERT OBERBILLIG1
SOUTHEAST ADULT FACILITY
COURTROOM 203
222 EAST JAVELINA

1 This case is currently on a calendar assigned to Judge Mark Aceto. Effective June 22, 2015, this
calendar (including this case) will be reassigned to Judge Robert Oberbillig. Judge Oberbillig’s
telephone number is (602) 506-2194.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

04/08/2015

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

MESA AZ 85210

NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling the court
at 602-506-2194, with all participating parties and counsel on the line, at the date and time
specified above. Counsel who will be lead counsel at trial must participate in the Telephonic
Status Conference.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped
envelopes were not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and
docketed by the Clerk of Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

FILED: Scheduling Order, signed 4/7/15

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/29/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

06/24/2015

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. ROBERT H. OBERBILLIG
I. Ostrander

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

RULING

The Court has read Defendant’s Rule 19 Motion to Join Plaintiff’s Wife, Anna McMullen,
as an Indispensable Party electronically filed on May 13, 2015.

Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, has failed to respond in any manner to
Defendant’s motion and the time for doing so under Rule 7.1(a), Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure, has expired. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(b), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court
finds that Plaintiff’s unexplained inaction should be deemed to be a consent to the granting of the
motion. Accordingly, and as Defendant’s motion and the record in this case establish that
Defendant is entitled as a matter of law to the relief it is seeking,

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s Rule 19 Motion to Join Plaintiff’s Wife, Anna
McMullen, as an Indispensable Party.

NOTE: COUNSEL SHALL UPLOAD AND E-FILE ALL PROPOSED ORDERS
IN WORD FORMAT ONLY TO ALLOW FOR POSSIBLE MODIFICATION BY THE
COURT.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/14/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

07/02/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. ROBERT H. OBERBILLIG
I. Ostrander

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

RULING

The Court has read the following:

 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment electronically filed on May 7, 2015;
 Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment electronically
filed on June 11, 2015; and
 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Motion for Summary Judgment
electronically filed on July 1, 2015.

In Defendant’s motion and reply, Defendant admits to the breach and has established it
has remedied the breach. There remain no specific performance or damages issues for trial.

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and finding in
favor of the Plaintiff on the issue of breach and for the Defendant on the issues of specific
performance being remedied and there being no damages. If any party believes they are entitled
to attorney’s fees, then that party shall file an application for fees by July 24, 2015, and include a
sentence and blank for an award of fees and costs to as of now, an undetermined party.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/16/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

09/15/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Kay

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court makes note of the following:

 Among other things, Plaintiff seeks a TRO and a Preliminary Injunction.

 Plaintiff seeks relief regarding action taken by Defendant on and after November
21, 2013.

 Plaintiff did not file this lawsuit until September 8, 2014.

 While laches may not bar a permanent injunction, it may well be a bar to
preliminary relief. A temporary injunction is sought upon the theory that there is
an urgent need for speedy action. When pursuit of injunctive relief is delayed, it
may be inferred that there is in fact a lack of need for such speedy action. Helena
Rubinstein, Inc. v. Frances Denney, Inc., 286 F. Supp. 132, 134 (1968).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

09/15/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court has issued an OSC and expects to expeditiously address Plaintiff’s request for
a permanent injunction. That said, in light of the circumstances (including but not limited to
those discussed above),

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s requests for a TRO and a Preliminary Injunction.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/22/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

09/17/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. ROBERT H. OBERBILLIG
I. Ostrander

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

RULING

The Court has read the following:

 Defendant’s Motion to Strike Attorney-Client Privileged Communication and Request
for Sanctions electronically filed on August 11, 2015;
 Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Motion to Strike and Request for Sanctions
electronically filed on September 1, 2015;
 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendant’s Motion to Strike
electronically filed on September 15, 2015;
 Defendant’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees electronically filed on July 24, 2015;
 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
electronically filed on August 24, 2015;
 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Application for Attorneys’
Fees and Costs electronically filed on September 11, 2015;

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

09/17/2015

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

 Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs electronically filed on July 24,
2015;
 Defendant’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
electronically filed on August 12, 2015; and
 Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
electronically filed on August 27, 2015.

The Court is of the opinion that the parties have fully and adequately briefed the issue(s)
in their pleadings and therefore oral argument would not assist the Court. Consequently,
pursuant to Rule 7.1(c), Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure, the Court will resolve the motions
without oral argument.

As to Defendant’s Motion to Strike Attorney-Client Privileged Communication and
Request for Sanctions, the Court finds that the letter was privileged and the issue of waiver is a
close call on both sides of the issue. Plaintiff’s counsel should have requested this Court’s
permission to use the letter or disclose it to the Court only under seal. Nevertheless, this Court
does not believe a sanction is warranted.

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s Motion to Strike and denying Defendant’s
Request for Sanctions.

As to the competing fee applications, the Court finds Plaintiff prevailed on the breach
issue and Defendant prevailed on the issue of specific performance and damages. The Plaintiff
refused to settle the case without an admission in the release. The record does not demonstrate
any substantive to be gained by Plaintiff insisting on an admission following a new election in
November or any reason by Defendant for not admitting the breach. Neither side has unclean
hands on this issue.

The Court finds that the Plaintiff was the prevailing party for purposes of A.R.S. § 12-
341.01. In its discretion, the Court awards Plaintiff $12,000.00 in attorneys’ fees.

The Court further finds no basis to award fees per A.R.S. § 12-349.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel shall submit for the Court’s review and
signature an appropriate form of Judgment by October 7, 2015. Any responses/objection thereto
shall be filed in accordance with the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating telephonic Status Conference set for October 14,
2015, at 8:45 a.m.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/06/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

10/03/2014

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
HEATHER E BUSHOR

J GARY LINDER

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 203-SEA

10:12 a.m. This is the time set for Order to Show Cause Hearing in this case. Plaintiff,
Michael McMullen, is present with counsel, David E. Johnson. Richard Andrews is present on
behalf of Defendant, Val Vista Lakes Community Association. Counsel, J. Gary Linder, is
present for Defendant.

This matter comes on in the courtroom off the record.

Court and counsel discuss the status of the case.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference for December 16, 2014 at
11:30 a.m. before:

HONORABLE MARK F. ACETO
SOUTHEAST ADULT FACILITY
COURTROOM 203
222 EAST JAVELINA
MESA AZ 85210

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

10/03/2014

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling this
division at 602-506-5261, with all participating parties and counsel on the line, at the date and
time specified above. Counsel who will be lead counsel at trial must participate in the
Telephonic Status Conference.

Pursuant to stipulation,

IT IS ORDERED extending the deadline for Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion
to Dismiss to January 9, 2015.

10:27 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/17/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

12/16/2014

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. MARK F. ACETO
M. Scott

Deputy

MICHAEL MCMULLEN
DAVID E JOHNSON

v.

VAL VISTA LAKES COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION, THE
J GARY LINDER

HEATHER E BUSHOR

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 203-SEA

11:37 a.m. This is the time set for Telephonic Status Conference in this case. Plaintiff is
represented by counsel, David Johnson. Defendant is represented by counsel, Heather E.
Bushor.

This matter comes on in the courtroom off the record.

Court and counsel discuss the status of the case.

IT IS ORDERED setting another Telephonic Status Conference for January 16, 2015
at 10:00 a.m. before:

HONORABLE MARK F. ACETO
SOUTHEAST ADULT FACILITY
COURTROOM 203
222 EAST JAVELINA
MESA AZ 85210

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2014-095508

12/16/2014

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: Plaintiff shall be responsible for initiating the conference call by calling this
division at 602-506-5261, with all participating parties and counsel on the line, at the date and
time specified above. Counsel who will be lead counsel at trial must participate in the
Telephonic Status Conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED extending Plaintiff’s response deadline to Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss Complaint to January 30, 2015.

11:50 a.m. Matter concludes.

Documents