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
- A.R.S. § 33-1802(4)
Decision Documents
17F-H1716022-REL-RHG Decision – 622756.pdf
**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:
- 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