HOA Lien Foreclosure | Default Packet | CV2014-094190
The court rejected the association’s lien-foreclosure default packet because the case had already been dismissed and reinstatement had been denied.
Last updated July 2, 2026. Case: Tanglewood HOA v. Molly Fagen, et al., Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2014-094190.
Scope note: This page covers Tanglewood HOA v. Molly Fagen, et al. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2014-094190) as a public Arizona superior-court HOA case guide. It is built from five filed minute entries, especially the August 11, 2015 dismissal, the January 7, 2016 ruling denying reinstatement, and the February 4, 2016 order rejecting the default packet. Currency caveat: the collected record ends with the February 4, 2016 order. Any later refiling, payment, settlement, or title activity is outside these records. Superior-court rulings bind only the parties and are not precedent. This page is educational and is not legal advice.
The takeaway
An HOA lien-foreclosure default packet is not enough if the case has already been dismissed. The association first needed a successful reinstatement order; without that, the commissioner rejected the default package because there was no pending case in which to enter judgment.
Case Participants
Neutral Parties
- Tanglewood HOA (Plaintiff)
Association that filed the lien-foreclosure and money-judgment action. - Molly Fagen (Defendant)
Named defendant in the association’s foreclosure case. - Jason Fagen (Defendant)
Named defendant in the association’s foreclosure case. - James Portman Webster (Counsel)
Counsel listed for Tanglewood HOA in the minute entries. - Hon. Robert H. Oberbillig (Judge)
Judge who dismissed the case and denied the motion to reinstate. - Comm. Margaret Benny (Commissioner)
Commissioner who rejected the default packet after dismissal.
What happened
Tanglewood HOA filed a lien-foreclosure and money-judgment case against the defendants. Early minute entries show the court directing the association to pursue default judgment through the commissioner’s default-judgment process.
In April 2015, the assigned judge noted that the defendants had not answered or otherwise appeared. Because no default judgment had been entered, the court continued the case on the dismissal calendar and warned that unadjudicated claims would be dismissed unless default judgment was entered before the deadline.
No default judgment was entered before the deadline. On August 11, 2015, the court dismissed all unadjudicated claims without prejudice and signed the minute entry as a final Rule 54(c) order.
The association later moved to reinstate the case. On January 7, 2016, the court denied reinstatement because the motion contained no grounds for reinstatement. The next month, Commissioner Benny received the association’s default packet for a lien foreclosure and money judgment, but rejected it because the case had already been dismissed and reinstatement had been denied.
Video overview of the ruling
An AI-generated video overview of Tanglewood HOA v. Fagen (CV2014-094190 (Maricopa County Superior Court)). HOA default packet for lien foreclosure was rejected after the case had already been dismissed. 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 Tanglewood HOA v. Fagen. Generated from the case filings; verify against the linked ruling below.
Procedural timeline
Complete uploaded source-document index
This index is generated from every public-facing source file currently present in assets/court_case_downloads/tanglewood-hoa-v-fagen/raw/: 5 PDFs. 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.
Minute Entry
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Minute Entry
Type: Court order/minute entry
Court or agency order; this is usually the document that tells readers what changed next.
Ruling
Type: Court order/minute entry
Final dismissal minute entry dismissing all unadjudicated claims without prejudice after no default judgment was entered by the dismissal-calendar deadline.
Ruling
Type: Court order/minute entry
Ruling denying Tanglewood HOA’s motion to reinstate because the motion contained no grounds for reinstatement.
Ruling
Type: Court order/minute entry
Order rejecting Tanglewood HOA’s default packet for lien foreclosure and money judgment because the case had already been dismissed without prejudice.
FAQ
Did the HOA obtain a foreclosure judgment in the collected record?
No. The final collected order rejected the association’s default packet because the case had already been dismissed without prejudice.
Why was the case dismissed?
The court had placed the matter on the dismissal calendar and warned that unadjudicated claims would be dismissed unless default judgment was entered by the deadline. No default judgment was entered before that deadline.
Why did the court deny reinstatement?
The January 2016 ruling states that the motion to reinstate contained no grounds for reinstatement.
What did the default-packet order decide?
The commissioner rejected the packet for lien foreclosure and money judgment because the case had been dismissed and reinstatement had been denied.
Is this a broad HOA-law ruling?
No. It is a narrow procedural superior-court order about dismissal, reinstatement, and default-judgment procedure in an HOA lien-foreclosure case.
Why is this case classified as standard?
It involved an HOA lien foreclosure, but the collected record does not include a substantive merits ruling interpreting HOA statutes or governing documents.
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 / citation | CV2014-094190 (Maricopa County Superior Court) |
|---|---|
| Court / tribunal | Superior Court |
| Decision / key date | February 4, 2016 |
| Judge / panel | Hon. Robert H. Oberbillig, Hon. Mark F. Aceto, Comm. Margaret Benny |
| Parties | Tanglewood HOA (Plaintiff) v. Molly Fagen and Jason Fagen (Defendants) |
| Topics | foreclosureliensassessmentsprocedure |
| Outcome / holding | The court denied the association’s motion to reinstate because it stated no grounds for reinstatement. It then rejected the association’s default packet for a lien foreclosure and money judgment because the case had already been dismissed without prejudice. |
| Primary public source | View source opinion/order |
Parties, Court, and Research Coverage
| Uploaded source package | 5 PDFs |
|---|---|
| Step-by-step docket roadmap | 5 roadmap entries |
| Video overview | Tanglewood HOA v. Fagen |
| Study / briefing material | 1 section |
| FAQ / homeowner questions | 6 questions |
| Curated download aliases | 1 download link |
Key Issues & Findings
Tanglewood HOA filed a lien-foreclosure and money-judgment case. After the case was dismissed without prejudice for failure to obtain default judgment by the dismissal-calendar deadline, the court denied the association’s motion to reinstate and later rejected its default packet because no case remained pending.
The April 2015 minute entry put the case on the dismissal calendar because defendants had not answered or otherwise appeared and default judgment had not been entered. The court warned that unadjudicated claims would be dismissed unless default judgment was entered by the new deadline.
No qualifying action was taken before the deadline, so on August 11, 2015 the court dismissed all claims without prejudice under Rule 54(c). When the association later moved to reinstate, the court denied the motion because it contained no grounds for reinstatement. Commissioner Benny then rejected the default packet for lien foreclosure and money judgment because the underlying case had already been dismissed and reinstatement had been denied.
This case is a narrow procedural reminder for HOA assessment and lien-foreclosure practice: a default packet cannot revive a dismissed case. If an association misses a dismissal-calendar deadline, it needs an adequate basis for reinstatement before default judgment can be considered.