Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited: Arizona HOA Superior Court Case Guide

HOA Judgment | CV2005-091216

The court granted judgment for Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association.

Last updated July 2, 2026. Case: Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited, Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2005-091216.

Scope note: This page covers Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2005-091216) as a public Arizona superior-court HOA case guide. It is built from the court’s collected minute entries through 2005-10-25; the complete set of collected minute entries is available in the source-document index below. Currency caveat: later filings, satisfaction history, appeals, and the formal written orders referenced by the minutes may not be included in these records. Superior-court rulings bind only the parties and are not precedent. This page is educational and is not legal advice.

The takeaway

The court granted judgment for Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association.

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association (Plaintiff)
    Association party in the HOA-related dispute. Court party records list counsel as Taz Evans.

Respondent Side

  • Pacific Scene Incorporated (Defendant)
    Listed in the court party records as defendant.
  • Silvergate Corporation (Defendant)
    Listed in the court party records as defendant.
  • Sundance Unlimited (Defendant)
    Opposing homeowner or property-side party identified in the case caption.

Neutral Parties

  • Hon. Maricopa County Superior Court (Judge)
    Judicial officer appearing in the collected minute entries.

What happened

The court granted judgment in favor of Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association against Sundance Unlimited, Silvergate Corporation, and/or Pacific Scene Corporation.

The minute entries identify the association and opposing property-side parties, then record the court’s disposition.

The collected record does not state a detailed legal analysis or full judgment terms, so this guide does not infer them.

Video overview of the ruling

An AI-generated video overview of Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited (CV2005-091216 (Maricopa County Superior Court)). Summer Place Terrace obtained judgment against corporate defendants in a thin record. This plain-language summary was generated from the court’s filings; the court’s own ruling controls.

Listen: audio deep dive on the ruling

An AI-generated audio deep dive walking through the court’s reasoning and disposition in Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited. Generated from the case filings; verify against the linked ruling below.

Audio overview generated with Google NotebookLM from the case’s court filings.

Procedural timeline

Step 2005-10-25 IT IS ORDERED granting the judgment in favor of Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association and against Sundance Unlimited, Silvergate Corporation and/or Pacific Scene Corporation.

Complete uploaded source-document index

This index is generated from every public-facing source file currently present in assets/court_case_downloads/summer-place-terrace-homeowners-association-v-sundance-unlimited/raw/: 1 PDF. Files are ordered by the date/sequence embedded in the normalized filename; AI-generated review materials are labeled separately and should not be treated as court filings.

Source 1 2005-10-25

Default Judgment

Type: Decision or judgment

Judgment-entry minute entering or approving judgment for the association.

FAQ

What did the superior court decide?

The court granted judgment for Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association.

Is this superior-court ruling precedent?

No. It binds the parties in this case but is useful only as a public record of how this dispute was handled.

Does the page summarize addresses or unit numbers?

No. Residential addresses and unit identifiers from the minute entries are intentionally omitted.

Who was the association party?

The association party identified in the collected court records was Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association.

Does this replace legal advice?

No. This is an educational case guide based on public minute entries, not legal advice.

Case Dossier

This generated dossier mirrors the structured data surfaced on the OAH/ADRE case pages. It is added from the curated court-case record and the custom page source package, while the hand-authored analysis below remains intact.

Case Summary

Case ID / citationCV2005-091216 (Maricopa County Superior Court)
Court / tribunalSuperior Court
Decision / key dateOctober 25, 2005
Judge / panelHon. Maricopa County Superior Court
PartiesSummer Place Terrace Homeowners Association (Plaintiff) v. Sundance Unlimited (Defendant)
Topics
Quiet TitleProcedure
Outcome / holding

The court granted a default judgment quieting title for Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association.

Primary public sourceView source opinion/order

Parties, Court, and Research Coverage

Uploaded source package1 PDF
Step-by-step docket roadmap1 roadmap entry
Video overviewSummer Place Terrace Homeowners Association v. Sundance Unlimited
Study / briefing material1 section
FAQ / homeowner questions5 questions
Curated download aliases1 download link

Key Issues & Findings

Case Summary

The court entered a default judgment quieting title in favor of Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association against Sundance Unlimited, Silvergate Corporation, and/or Pacific Scene Corporation.

Key Issues & Findings

The court entered a default judgment quieting title in favor of Summer Place Terrace Homeowners Association against Sundance Unlimited, Silvergate Corporation, and/or Pacific Scene Corporation.

This was a quiet title action resolved by default, not an assessment or lien dispute; the collected entries do not include contested substantive analysis, so the page treats the ruling as a procedural quiet-title judgment record only.

Why It Matters

This case is useful as a public record of an HOA quiet-title default judgment, but the collected minute entries are too thin to serve as guidance on contested HOA law.

← Back to Superior Court cases