Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case LC2018-000316: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for C B S – 136 Homeowners Association.

Case Number

LC2018-000316

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

8/10/2018

Case Type

Lower Court Appeals

Judge

Francis, Jillian

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/14/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

01/11/2019

Docket Code 019
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
STATE OF ARIZONA (001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
DENA ROSEN BENJAMIN

JUDGE STARR
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered Appellant’s Motion to File Consolidated Reply Brief
Exceeding Word Limit of JRAD Rule 8(b).
For good cause appearing,
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion as follows.
Appellant may file a single, consolidated Reply Brief, not later than 30 days after the
filing of the State’s Answering Brief. The word limit for the consolidated Reply Brief shall be
10,000 words.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Filed ***

05/17/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

05/14/2019

Docket Code 019
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
STATE OF ARIZONA (001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13523 W SKY HAWK DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
DENA ROSEN BENJAMIN

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion for Sanctions filed by Appellee Annette Cohen, the
Response filed by Attorney Brian E. Ditsch, and the Reply.
Cohen asks this Court to impose a financial sanction against Ditsch under its “inherent
right to sanction,” in an amount it deems “fair and just.”
The Court understands that Cohen is frustrated by the legal process in this case. But the
Court has no inherent right to sanction an attorney. Nor has Cohen shown that Ditsch’s actions
were in any way contemptuous so as to justify a finding of contempt.
Moreover, Cohen has not established that she is entitled to sanctions under A.R.S. § 12-
349, because she has not shown that the appeal was groundless, and not made in good faith.
Thus,
IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion for Sanctions.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

05/14/2019

Docket Code 019
Form L000
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED signing the minute entry as a formal order of the Court.

/s/ Patricia A. Starr

THE HON. PATRICIA A. STARR

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/24/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

08/23/2018

Docket Code 023
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW ORDERS

On August 10, 2018, Appellant, CBS – 136 Homeowners Association, filed Notice of
Appeal for Judicial Review of Administrative Decision against Appellee, Annette Cohen, and
Appellee, Arizona Department of Real Estate, pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated
(A.R.S.) §§ 12–901 to 12–914.
IT IS ORDERED that Appellant serve both Appellees with a copy of the Notice of Appeal
for Judicial Review of Administrative Decision in the manner provided by A.R.S. § 12–906.1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant shall file proof of service with the Clerk of
the Superior Court of Maricopa County as required by Rule 4 of the Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure. See Rule 4(g) and Rule 4(i), Ariz. R. Civ. P.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant provide both Appellees with a copy of this
minute entry.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant shall file a notice of action as required by
A.R.S. § 12–904(B).

1 A.R.S. § 12–906 incorporates the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure for service of process.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

08/23/2018

Docket Code 023
Form L000
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant shall order and make arrangements to pay for
the preparation of pertinent portions of the record as required by A.R.S. § 12–904(B).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Notice of Appearance from all Appellees shall be due
20 days from the date of service of Appellant’s appeal.
Appellant is advised that, if Appellant fails to effectuate service or to order the record or
the transcripts as ordered herein, this Court may dismiss these proceedings.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the administrative agency or board shall transmit its
record to the Clerk of this Court as required by A.R.S. § 12–904(B) and provide a Certification of
Record on Review to Appellant and a notice to this Court that the transmittal has occurred.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellant and Appellees are to file briefs in accordance
with Rules 6 through 8 of the Rules of Procedure for Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

09/12/2018

Docket Code 025
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered Motion for Extension of Time filed by Appellee the Arizona
Department of Real Estate on September 6, 2018. Appellee has not complied with Rule 2.14,
Local Rules of Practice, Maricopa County. That Rule requires Appellee to include a statement
regarding whether the opposing party objects to an extension, or a statement indicating that the
movant made an attempt to contact the opposing party but was unable to do so.
Therefore, this Court will not rule on the Motion until the expiration of the time for a
Response has expired, or Appellee has filed a supplement to the Motion explaining that it has
complied with Rule 2.14.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/24/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

09/21/2018

Docket Code 016
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion for Extension filed by Appellee Arizona
Department of Real Estate, which is unopposed.
For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion for Extension. The Department’s responses to the
pending Motions to Dismiss will be due no later than October 5, 2018.
The Court has also considered the Motion to File Consolidated Replies filed by Appellee
Annette Cohen on September 12, 2018. Counsel for The Arizona Department of Real Estate
does not object to the motion. Counsel for Appellant CBS-136 Homeowners Association does
object.
The Court finds that it would be most helpful to this Court to receive a consolidated
Reply. Moreover, if counsel for Appellant is concerned about the pending due date for the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

09/21/2018

Docket Code 016
Form L000
Page 2

Opening Brief, he may request a stay of that deadline pending the Court’s ruling on the Motions
to Dismiss.
Thus,
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to File Consolidated Replies.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/12/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

10/11/2018

Docket Code 016
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Answering Brief.
For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED the Answering Brief will be due 45 days after the Court’s ruling on the
pending Motions to Dismiss.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Filed ***

10/29/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

10/25/2018

Docket Code 019
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion to Dismiss Party Appellee and the Amended and
Restated Motion to Dismiss Appeal filed by Appellee Annette Cohen, the Responses filed by
Appellant CBS-136 Homeowners Association, and the Consolidated Reply.
Appellant requested oral argument, but the Court finds argument would not aid its
disposition of this matter. The request for oral argument is therefore denied.
First, the Court finds that as the Petitioner in the administrative hearing, and as a party of
record, Appellee Cohen is a proper party to this appeal. Appellee did not act improperly or
violate any right of Appellee Cohen be filing this action, or including her as a party.
Second, there is no basis for dismissal of the appeal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Ariz. R.
Civ. P. The Rules of Civil Procedure generally do not apply to administrative appeals, unless
specifically provided for in the Rules of Procedure for Judicial Review of Administrative

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

10/25/2018

Docket Code 019
Form L000
Page 2

Decisions (“JRAD Rules”). Rule 1(b), JRAD Rules. Rule 12, Ariz. R. Civ. P., is not one of the
Rules which applies. Moreover, Cohen’s arguments would more appropriately be made in an
Answering Brief.
Thus,
IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Dismiss Party Appellee Annette Cohen.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Amended and Restated Motion to Dismiss.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Appellant’s requests for attorneys’ fees and costs,
as the Court does not find Appellee’s motions to be frivolous.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED signing the minute entry as a formal order of the Court.

/s/ Patricia A. Starr

THE HON. PATRICIA A. STARR

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/07/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

12/06/2018

Docket Code 016
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

EXTEND TIME FOR FILING GRANTED

The Court has received the Appellant’s Motion to Extend Time to File Appellant’s Reply
Brief, filed on December 4, 2018. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED Appellant’s motion and extending the time for filing the reply brief up
to and including January 14, 2018, all in accordance with the formal written Order signed by the
Court on December 5, 2018, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on December 6, 2018.

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.

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Filed ***

12/17/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

12/11/2018

Docket Code 023
Form L000
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE PATRICIA ANN STARR
C. Avena

Deputy

C B S - 136 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BRIAN E DITSCH

v.

ANNETTE COHEN (001)
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
(001)
ANNETTE COHEN
13603 W COUNTRYSIDE DR
SUN CITY WEST AZ 85375
LYNETTE EVANS

JUDGE STARR
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS
REMAND DESK-LCA-CCC

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Arizona Department of Real
Estate (“the Department”), the Response filed by Appellant CBS-136 Homeowners Association
(“the Association”), and the Department’s Reply. The Association requested oral argument, but
the Court finds that oral argument is not necessary for its disposition of this matter. The request
is thus denied.
The case arises from a dispute between the Association and one of its homeowners,
Annette Cohen. Cohen filed a petition with the Department, which referred the matter to the

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

12/11/2018

Docket Code 023
Form L000
Page 2

Office Administrative Hearings. After a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge found in favor
of Cohen. The Real Estate Commissioner later denied the Association’s request for rehearing.
The Department argues that it should be dismissed as an Appellee in this matter. First,
the Department argues that it a non-jural entity, which has no power to sue or be sued. The
Court of Appeals has specifically held that “the legislature has authorized suits to be brought
directly against administrative agencies in cases filed under the Administrative Review Act.”
Marlar v. State, 136 Ariz. 404, 408 (App. 1983). But that holding predated the amendment of
A.R.S. § 12-908, which no longer mandates that an agency be named as an appellee. And in
Marlar, the appeal arose from a final decision of the agency, not an ALJ decision.
The Court agrees with the Department that under A.R.S. § 12-908, it is not a necessary
party to every appeal arising from a dispute between a homeowner and her association. Lewis v.
Arizona State Personnel Board, 240 Ariz. 330, ¶ 30 (App. 2016). And here, the binding decision
which is before this Court is that of the administrative law judge, not the Department. A.R.S. §
32-2199.02(B). Because the request for rehearing was denied, the order issued by the ALJ is
binding and subject to judicial review pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08.
The Department recognizes that given the nature of the appeal in this case, however, a
state entity should be a party. The Department does not object to the substitution of the State of
Arizona as an Appellee.
For those reasons,
IT IS ORDERED substituting the State of Arizona as Appellee for the Arizona
Department of Real Estate.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED counsel for the State of Arizona must file a notice of
appearance in this matter within 15 days of the filing of this minute entry.
The Court notes that the Association is arguing that the statutes at issue in this matter are
facially unconstitutional. The Association is therefore required to serve a copy of its Opening
Brief on the attorney general, speaker of the house of representatives, and president of the senate.
A.R.S. § 12-841(A). This Court will require proof that those entities have been served before it
will rule on the constitutionality of the statutes challenged by the Association.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

LC2018-000316-001 DT

12/11/2018

Docket Code 023
Form L000
Page 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED signing this minute entry as a formal order of the Court.

/s/ Patricia A. Starr

THE HON. PATRICIA A. STARR

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

NOTICE: LC cases are not under the e-file system. As a result, when a party files a docu-
ment, the system does not generate a courtesy copy for the Judge. Therefore, you will have to
deliver to the Judge a conformed courtesy copy of any new filings.

Documents