Case Summary
| Case ID | 20F-H2019005-REL-RHG |
|---|---|
| Agency | ADRE |
| Tribunal | OAH |
| Decision Date | 2020-05-05 |
| Administrative Law Judge | Tammy L. Eigenheer |
| Outcome | no |
| Filing Fees Refunded | $0.00 |
| Civil Penalties | $0.00 |
Parties & Counsel
| Petitioner | Michael J. Stoltenberg | Counsel | — |
|---|---|---|---|
| Respondent | Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association | Counsel | Nicole Payne |
Alleged Violations
Governing Documents
Outcome Summary
The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the petition because the controversy was not ripe. The Petitioner admitted that he had denied the HOA permission to enter his property to perform the maintenance he was suing them for not performing.
Why this result: The matter was not ripe for determination because the Petitioner had denied the Respondent access to the property.
Key Issues & Findings
Failure to provide landscaping maintenance
Petitioner alleged Respondent failed to maintain landscaping. Petitioner admitted he had notified Respondent it was not allowed to enter his property until January 2020.
Orders: Petition dismissed.
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: respondent_win
Decision Documents
20F-H2019005-REL-RHG Decision – 787446.pdf
20F-H2019005-REL-RHG Decision – ../20F-H2019005-REL/752939.pdf
**Case Summary: *Stoltenberg v. Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association***
**Case No.** 20F-H2019005-REL-RHG
**Date of Rehearing Decision:** May 5, 2020
**Overview**
This summary details the proceedings of an administrative rehearing before the Arizona Department of Real Estate. The matter involves a dispute regarding landscaping maintenance obligations. It is crucial to distinguish between the original decision (dismissed for lack of ripeness) and the subsequent rehearing (which affirmed the dismissal).
**Procedural History: The Original Decision**
In the initial proceeding (Case No. 20F-H2019005-REL), Petitioner Michael J. Stoltenberg alleged that the Respondent, Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association (HOA), failed to comply with a prior ruling requiring it to provide landscaping maintenance.
During the original hearing on October 30, 2019, the Petitioner admitted to the following facts:
* In 2013, he notified the HOA it was not allowed to enter his property.
* In April 2019, he notified the HOA that he expected maintenance to resume in January 2020.
* At the time of the 2019 hearing, the HOA still did not have permission to enter the property.
On November 14, 2019, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Tammy L. Eigenheer dismissed the petition. The ALJ ruled that because the HOA was barred from the property at the time of filing, the allegation that the HOA was violating governing documents was "not ripe for determination".
**The Rehearing: Case No. 20F-H2019005-REL-RHG**
The Petitioner requested a rehearing, arguing he was being "proactive" in seeking a resolution before the anticipated January 2020 violation. He further argued that by the time a rehearing occurred, the HOA would be in violation. The rehearing was granted and held on May 5, 2020.
**Key Arguments at Rehearing**
1. **Petitioner’s Admissions:** The Petitioner reiterated that he had denied the HOA access until January 2020.
2. **New Claims:** The Petitioner attempted to expand the scope of the dispute by arguing the HOA failed to maintain his *neighbors’* properties.
3. **Current Controversy:** The Petitioner argued that the HOA’s ongoing failure to maintain the landscaping *after* January 2020 created a present controversy.
**Legal Analysis and
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
- Michael J. Stoltenberg (petitioner)
Appeared on his own behalf
Respondent Side
- Nicole Payne (Respondent Attorney)
Carpenter, Hazlewood, Delgado & Bolen LLP
Represented Respondent at hearing - Lydia A. Peirce Linsmeier (Respondent Attorney)
Carpenter, Hazlewood, Delgado & Bolen LLP
Listed on distribution list for the rehearing order
Neutral Parties
- Tammy L. Eigenheer (ALJ)
Office of Administrative Hearings - Judy Lowe (Commissioner)
Arizona Department of Real Estate
Listed on distribution list
