Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2017-013508: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Windmill Village Homeowners Association Inc.

Case Number

CV2017-013508

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

11/8/2017

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Warner, Randall

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/17/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

01/11/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
991 SOUTH 219TH DRIVE
BUCKEYE ARIZONA 85326

DEBORAH BIBBS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

BENCH TRIAL VACATED
ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and
Motion for Continuation of Trial Date, filed on January 18, 2018.

Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the 4-hour Bench Trial set on February 5, 2018 at 8:30 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment on February 5 2018 at 8:30 a.m. with all parties in attendance.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

01/11/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,
please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/17/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

01/16/2018

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
DEBORAH BIBBS
991 SOUTH 219TH DRIVE
BUCKEYE ARIZONA 85326

ORAL ARGUMENT SET
TRIAL VACATED

The court has received and considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment – And
– Motion for Continuation of Trial Date, filed on January 8, 2018.

Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the four (4) hour Bench Trial set for February 5, 2018 at 8:30
a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on February 5, 2018 at 8:30 a.m.
(Time allotted: 30 minutes) in this division.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

01/16/2018

Docket Code 081
Form V000A
Page 2

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,
please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044.

Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed without a
court reporter.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/07/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
C. Ramirez

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 712 – East Court Building

8:22 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument Re: Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment. Plaintiff is represented by counsel, Nicholas C Nogami and Mark Sahl. Defendants
are present on their own behalf.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed
on January 8, 2018. No answers or responses has been submitted by the Defendants.

Argument is presented.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

9:04 a.m. Hearing concludes.

LATER:

The Court has considered Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed January 8,
2018, Plaintiff’s Separate Statement of Facts in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment
(with exhibits), and the oral argument conducted on February 5, 2018. Defendants did not file a
response but appeared for the oral argument. An answer was not filed by Defendants.

Plaintiff is a nonprofit corporation whose members are owners of lots in a planned
community known as Windmill Village. Defendants have been owners of a lot in that
community. Plaintiff is governed by the Declaration of Covenants Conditions and Restrictions
for Windmill Village (the CC&Rs). The CC&Rs provide in pertinent part that any recreational
vehicle exceeding one ton shall be parked, kept, placed or maintained on a lot so that it is not
visible to any neighboring property unless there is prior written approval by a designated
committee. In November 2015, Defendants stored their recreational vehicle on their lot and it
was visible to neighboring properties. No written approval had been obtained to store it at that
location. Plaintiff demanded Defendants remove the recreational vehicle and not return it to their
lot. Defendants did not comply. Plaintiff sent letters to Defendants in January 2016 and
September 2017 demanding compliance. Defendants did not respond. Plaintiff filed a complaint
seeking injunctive relief and a claim for breach of contract.
Summary judgment is appropriate only if no genuine issue of material fact exists and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56, Ariz.R.Civ.P., Nat’l Bank of
Ariz. v. Thruston, 218 Ariz. 112 (App. 2008), Colonial Tri-City Ltd. P’ship v. Ben Franklin
Stores, Inc., 179 Ariz. 428, 432 (App. 1993) and Johnson v. Earnhardt’s Gilbert Dodge, Inc.,
212 Ariz. 381, 385, 132 P.3d 825, 829 (2006). Thus, a motion for summary judgment should
only be granted if the acts produced in support of the claim or defense have so little probative
value, given the quantum of evidence required, that reasonable people could not agree with the
conclusion advanced by the proponent of the claim or defense. Orme Sch. v. Reeves, 166 Ariz.
301, 309, 802 P.2d 1000, 1008 (1990). The facts must be viewed in a light most favorable to the
party against whom it was direct and summary judgment is inappropriate if there is any doubt as
to whether an issue of material fact exists. Lennar Corp. v. Transamerica Ins. Co., 227 Ariz.
238, 242 (App. 2011) and Joseph v. Markovitz, 27 Ariz.App. 122, 125, 551 P.2d 571, 574
(1976). A statement of facts is the only means by which a party opposing summary judgment
may create a record showing the existence of those facts which establish a genuine issue of
material fact or otherwise preclude summary judgment in favor of the moving party. See Rule
56, Ariz.R.Civ.P.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3

The opponent of a motion for summary judgment does not raise a genuine issue of fact by
merely stating in the record that such an issue exists. The party must show that competent
evidence is available which will justify a trial on the issue. Flowers v. K-Mart Corp. 126 Ariz.
495, 499 (App. 1980). An unsupported contention that a dispute exists is insufficient to defeat a
motion for summary judgment. Sewell v. Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 426 (App. 1978). A
nonmoving party may not rest on allegation in its pleadings. See Rule 56, Ariz.R.Civ.P. and
MacConnell v. Mitten, 131 Ariz. 22, 25 (1982). Vague or generalized unsupported statements
are not sufficient to withstand a motion for summary judgment. Burrington v. Gila County, 159
Ariz. 320, 767 P.2d 43 (App. 1988).

Generally, a party must file a written response whenever a motion is filed. Schwab v.
Ames Const., 207 Ariz. 56, 59, 83 P.3d 56, 59 (App. 2004); Choisser v. State ex rel. Herman, 12
Ariz.App. 259, 260, 469 P.2d 493, 494 (1970). If the party opposing a motion fails to respond in
writing, the trial court may, in its discretion, dispose of the motion summarily. Choisser, 12
Ariz.App. at 260, 469 P.2d at 494; Ariz. R. Civ. P. 7.1(b). When a motion is one for summary
judgment, Rule 56 provides that a party opposing a summary judgment motion “must file
affidavits, memoranda or both within 15 days after service of the motion.” The admonition in
Rule 56(e) simply means that a nonmoving party who fails to respond does so at his peril
because the trial court will presume that any uncontroverted evidence favorable to the movant,
and from which only one inference can be drawn, is true. Schwab, 207 Ariz. at 60, 83 P.3d at 60;
Choisser, 12 Ariz.App. at 261, 469 P.2d at 495. If that uncontroverted evidence would entitle the
movant to a judgment as a matter of law, then the trial court must grant the summary judgment
motion. Id. However, if a moving party's summary judgment motion fails to show an entitlement
to summary judgment, by either omitting evidence of essential elements of its claim or by
providing evidence which supports conflicting inferences on a material issue, then there is no
basis for awarding summary judgment, even if a written response is not filed. United Bank of
Arizona v. Allyn, 167 Ariz. 191, 196-97, 805 P.2d 1012, 1017-18 (App. 1990).

Plaintiff has the burden of establishing a contract, its breach, and damages that resulted
from the breach. Savoca Masonry Co. v. Homes & Son Const. Co., 112 Ariz. 392, 542 P.2d 817
(1975) and Graham v. Asbury, 112 Ariz. 184 (1975). The Court may award attorney fees arising
out of a contract, express or implied. A.R.S. § 12-341.01. When interpreting contracts, the
parties’ intent controls. When a contract is ambiguous (when there is more than one reasonable
interpretation), what the parties intended is a fact question decided on the contract language and
any parole evidence. Taylor v. State Farm, 175 Ariz. 148, 854 P.2d 1134 (1993). The court will
look to the plain meaning of the words as viewed in the context of the contract as a whole to
discover and enforce the parties’ intent at the time the contract was made. Great W. Bank v. LJC
Dev., LLC, 238 Ariz. 470, 475 (App. 2015).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 4

Given the quantum of evidence required to establish the claims in the complaint and,
viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to Defendants, the Court finds there are genuine
issues of material fact and summary judgment for the Plaintiff is not appropriate. At oral
argument, Defendants did not dispute most of the facts relied upon by Plaintiff. However,
Defendants contend their recreational vehicle is not visible from neighboring properties.
Defendants also argue the association, through a board member, gave them permission to park
their vehicle on their property. When Defendants asked for written authorization, they were told
it was not necessary. Defendants argue they reasonably believed the board member had authority
to grant them permission to park their vehicle on their property. There are thus issues for the
trier of fact to resolve.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/12/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/09/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
C. Ramirez

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

DEBORAH BIBBS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
COMM. ABRAMSON

MINUTE ENTRY

This division has received Plaintiff’s e-filed e-filed Application for Entry of Default
against Defendants, Stanley Bibbs and Deborah Bibbs in the above-captioned case.

IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above referenced
document(s).

The parties are advised that Commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
Lindsay Abramson.

IT IS ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a default
judgment must be e-filed.

Pursuant to Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117, default judgment
packets are not permitted to be e-filed. Accordingly, parties are directed to hand-deliver a

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

02/09/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2

default coversheet and copies of the necessary filed documents to the Commissioner’s division
for the entry of a default judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, no further action will be taken by the assigned
Commissioner until the necessary filed documents and coversheet are delivered to the division.

The parties/counsel can find the default judgment coversheet on the Court’s website at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/forms.asp

The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked
questions at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDol.asp

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

03/09/2018

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER LINDSAY P. ABRAMSON
D. Adams

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.

MINUTE ENTRY

IT IS ORDERED setting a hearing on Default Judgment regarding the Application on
April 4, 2018, at 1:30 p.m. in this Division:

Maricopa County Superior Court
East Court Building
101 W. Jefferson
Courtroom 812
Phoenix, AZ 85003

Plaintiff is advised that the issuance of this minute entry is intended to give notice of the
Court’s acceptance of Plaintiff’s electronically filed proposed order. Service of notice of hearing
upon the party ordered to appear is still required under the applicable rules and statutes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/09/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

04/04/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER LINDSAY P. ABRAMSON
A. Aycock

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 812 - East Court Building.

1:32 p.m. This is the time set for Default Hearing. Plaintiff is represented by counsel,
Nick Nogami. No other parties are present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Nick Nogami is sworn and makes statements to the Court.

Discussion is held.

IT IS ORERED directing Plaintiff to submit, on or before April 6, 2018, a new proposed
form of judgment for the Court’s review and signature.

1:40 p.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/16/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

04/13/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER LINDSAY P. ABRAMSON
A. Hatfield

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.

MINUTE ENTRY

IT IS ORDERED approving and settling formal written Default Judgment and Permanent
Injunction Order signed by the Court on April 13, 2018 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on April
13, 2018.

Please note: The court has signed a paper copy of the order which was originally
provided electronically. Therefore, copies of the order and self-addressed, stamped envelopes
are not available for mailing to the parties. After the order has been scanned and docketed by the
Clerk of Court, copies of this order will be available through the ECR online at
www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through www.AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public
Access Terminals at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/15/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

08/13/2018

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
DEBORAH BIBBS
991 S. 219TH DRIVE
BUCKEYE ARIZONA 85326

JUDGE STEPHENS

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:41 a.m. This is the time set for a return hearing on an Order to Show Cause why they
should not be held in contempt for failing to abide by this Court’s Order dated April 13, 2018.
Counsel, Nick Nogami, is present appearing for counsel, Mark K. Sahl, on behalf of Plaintiff,
Windmill Village Homeowners Association, Inc. Defendants, Stanley Bibbs and Deborah Bibbs
are present on their own behalf.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The parties report that they are attempting to resolve this matter on their own.

IT IS ORDERED vacating today’s Order to Show Cause return hearing and resetting
same on September 13, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting an Evidentiary Hearing for September 13, 2018 at
10:00 a.m.

8:13 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/14/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

09/13/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
991 S 219TH DR
BUCKEYE AZ 85326

DEBORAH BIBBS
991 S 219TH DR
BUCKEYE AZ 85326
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

10:13 a.m. This is the time set for an Evidentiary Hearing and a return hearing on an
Order to Show Cause why Defendants should not be held in contempt for failing to abide by this
Court’s Order dated April 13, 2018. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff is counsel, Nick Nogami.
Defendants, Stanley Bibbs and Deborah Bibbs are present on their own behalves. Also present is
Corrine Perry, a representative from Windmill village Homeowners’ Association, Inc.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Prior to the hearing today, the parties spoke outside of the courtroom and stated that they
have reached a settlement in this matter. Plaintiffs request a few moments to verify that the RV at
issue has been moved.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

09/13/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

10:15 a.m. The Court stands at recess.

10:22 a.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

Plaintiffs state that verification has been made by a HOA member that Defendants’ RV
has been moved, and they no longer wish to continue with the Evidentiary Hearing or the hearing
on Order to Show Cause.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Evidentiary Hearing and the hearing on an Order to Show
Cause.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing the Application for Contempt of Court.

10:22 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/22/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

11/20/2017

Docket Code 087
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

DEBORAH BIBBS
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ISSUED

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s Request to Schedule Hearing Re: Order
to Show Cause, filed on November 8, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED setting an Order to Show Cause Hearing regarding why a permanent
injunction should not be entered against him/her from acts specified in Plaintiff’s Verified
Complaint on December 11, 2017 at 8:30 a.m.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. 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.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/13/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

12/11/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

WINDMILL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION INC
MARK K SAHL

v.

STANLEY BIBBS, et al.
STANLEY BIBBS
991 S. 219TH DRIVE
BUCKEYE ARIZONA 85326

DEBORAH BIBBS
991 S. 219TH DRIVE
BUCKEYE ARIZONA 85326

TRIAL TO THE COURT SET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:35 a.m. This is the time set for an Order to Show Cause Hearing. Appearing on behalf
of Plaintiff is counsel, Nicholas Nogami. Defendants Stanley Bibbs and Deborah Bibbs are
present on their own behalf.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The parties stipulate to combine the Order to Show Cause Hearing with a Trial on
the Merits. The parties advise the Court that they are prepared to set a trial date. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. Setting Trial to the Court on February 5, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. (time allotted: 4 hours)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

12/11/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

2. Joint Pretrial Statement: Counsel shall file, no later than January 26, 2018, a Joint
Pretrial Statement signed by all counsel/pro pers. In addition to the information required
by Rule 16, the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include,

 A Final Trial Witness List. This list shall contain the name of each witness a
party actually intends to call at Trial, the day on which they intend to call
each witness and the estimated time needed for direct, cross and re-direct
examination. (see Witness Information Form attached)

 Whether or not the Rule of Exclusion of Witnesses is being invoked.

3. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: This matter is set for a trial to the
bench. Any party who requests Rule 52 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
shall file a written request no later than thirty (30) days prior to trial. A party who
makes this request shall file Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law no
later than twenty (20) days after the trial concludes, unless otherwise ordered by the
Court. Any party who did not request Rule 52 findings may file its own Proposed
Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law by the same deadline. In addition to filing
the Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, an electronic version in Word
or Word-compatible format shall be provided to the Division’s Judicial Assistant. If
Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not filed as ordered, the
request shall be deemed waived.

Exhibits

4. Counsel or their assistants are to contact the clerk of this division at 602-506-1471, no
later than January 26, 2018, regarding the proper procedures for submitting exhibits
to be marked for trial in this division.

No later than January 30, 2018, all parties shall deliver their exhibits. The parties
are directed to meet in person to exchange the exhibits before coming to court and,
to the extent possible, remove any duplicate exhibits. The parties should not reserve
exhibit numbers for all Defendants’ exhibits, all Plaintiffs’ exhibits, miscellaneous
demonstrative exhibits, and the like. The parties shall also present original
depositions for filing at that time.

Exhibits are marked in numerical order per party, making it necessary to mark all of
one party’s exhibits before marking the other party’s. Accordingly, the Defendant’s
exhibits numbering shall start at the next number following the last of Plaintiff’s

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

12/11/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

exhibits. (For example, Plaintiff submits 82 exhibits, which are marked Exhibit 1
through 82. Defendant submits 63 exhibits, which are marked 83 through 145). Please
do not combine the parties’ exhibits. Each side’s exhibits must be submitted
separately and in numerical order.

IT IS ORDERED that any exhibit in excess of 20 pages shall be bates stamped.

A trial date now having been set, the parties may, without leave of the Court, modify the
deadlines previously set in the previously filed Scheduling Order using the trial date as a
guideline for the new dates. Should the parties reach an impasse in their discussions to modify
the deadlines, they may contact the Court for the setting of a telephonic status conference.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,
please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed
consent to proceed without a court reporter.

8:38 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

12/11/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

WITNESS INFORMATION FORM

Please note that there are approximately 5 hours of trial time which includes two 15-minute
breaks and 1½ hours for lunch.

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT &
RE-DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

3

4

5

6

DIRECT, RE-DIRECT & CROSS
TOTAL:_________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT &
RE-DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

3

4

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2017-013508

12/11/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

5

6

DIRECT, RE-DIRECT & CROSS
TOTAL:_______________

TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE:___________________________

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANT
OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

TOTAL ESTIMATED TRIAL TIME: 4 hours.

Documents