Thomas Satterlee vs. Green Valley Country Club Vistas II Property

Note: A Rehearing was requested for this case. The dashboard statistics reflect the final outcome of the rehearing process.

Case Summary

Case ID 17F-H1716018-REL-RHG, 17F-H1716022-REL-RHG
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2018-03-15
Administrative Law Judge Tammy L. Eigenheer
Outcome The ALJ granted the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. The tribunal found it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the Respondent did not meet the statutory definition of a 'planned community' under A.R.S. § 33-1802(4), as it did not own real estate or hold a covenant to maintain roadways.
Filing Fees Refunded $0.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner Thomas Satterlee Counsel
Respondent Green Valley Country Club Vistas II Property Owners’ Association Counsel James A. Robles

Alleged Violations

A.R.S. § 33-1802(4)

Outcome Summary

The ALJ granted the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss. The tribunal found it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the Respondent did not meet the statutory definition of a 'planned community' under A.R.S. § 33-1802(4), as it did not own real estate or hold a covenant to maintain roadways.

Why this result: Respondent is not a planned community as defined by statute.

Key Issues & Findings

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Petitioner alleged Respondent was subject to ADRE jurisdiction as a planned community due to maintenance of entrance walls and signs. Respondent moved to dismiss based on not meeting the statutory definition of a planned community.

Orders: The consolidated petitions were dismissed with prejudice due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: petitioner_lost

Cited:

  • A.R.S. § 33-1802(4)

Decision Documents

17F-H1716022-REL-RHG Decision – 622756.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-27T21:13:37 (85.6 KB)

**Case Summary: Satterlee v. Green Valley Country Club Vistas II Property Owners’ Association Case Numbers: 17F-H1716018-REL-RHG / 17F-H1716022-REL-RHG Forum: Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Date of Decision:** March 15, 2018

Procedural Context: Rehearing This administrative decision is explicitly a rehearing of consolidated matters previously decided in 2017. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) addressed a renewed challenge regarding whether the Arizona Department of Real Estate (ADRE) and OAH possessed subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute,.

I. Original Proceedings (2017)

  • Procedural History: In the original proceeding, the Respondent (Green Valley Country Club Vistas II) filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing it did not meet the statutory definition of a "planned community" under A.R.S. § 33-1802(4) because it did not own real estate or possess roadway easements,.
  • Original Outcome: On July 7, 2017, the Commissioner accepted the ALJ’s recommendation to dismiss the case. The ALJ found that the Respondent was not a "planned community," and therefore, the administrative bodies lacked jurisdiction to hear the petitions,.
  • Transition to Rehearing: The Petitioner (Thomas Satterlee) filed a notice of rehearing in September 2017, which the Commissioner granted,.

II. Rehearing Proceedings (2018)

  • Main Issue: The central legal issue remained whether the Respondent qualified as a "planned community," which determines whether the OAH has subject matter jurisdiction. The specific dispute focused on statutory interpretation regarding the maintenance of community entrances,.
  • Key Arguments:
  • Petitioner’s Argument: The Petitioner argued that because the developer built walls and a sign at the community entrance, and the Respondent maintained the landscaping around them, the Association held a "covenant to maintain roadways." The Petitioner urged the ALJ to interpret "roadway" broadly to include "roadway systems," encompassing the land and improvements at the entrance.
  • Respondent’s Argument: The Respondent renewed its Motion to Dismiss, asserting that landscaping around a sign does not constitute a "roadway." Consequently, the Association still lacked the necessary covenant to maintain roadways required by A.R.S. § 33-1802(4) to qualify as a planned community,.

III. Legal Analysis and Final Decision The ALJ ruled in favor of the Respondent, dismissing the petitions with prejudice. The decision rested on the following legal points:

  1. Subject Matter Jurisdiction: The ALJ emphasized that administrative jurisdiction is strictly defined by statute. Jurisdiction cannot be waived, nor can it be conferred by the agreement or estoppel of the parties, [

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • Thomas Satterlee (Petitioner)
    Appeared on his own behalf

Respondent Side

  • James A. Robles (Respondent Attorney)
    Green Valley Country Club Vistas II Property Owners’ Association

Neutral Parties

  • Tammy L. Eigenheer (ALJ)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
  • Douglas (Former ALJ)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
    Referenced as handling previous docket number 15F-H1515008-BFS
  • Judy Lowe (Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
  • Felicia Del Sol (Administrative Staff)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
    Transmitted the order