Case Summary
| Case ID | 21F-H2121042-REL |
|---|---|
| Agency | ADRE |
| Tribunal | OAH |
| Decision Date | 2021-11-01 |
| Administrative Law Judge | Sondra J. Vanella |
| Outcome | none |
| Filing Fees Refunded | $0.00 |
| Civil Penalties | $0.00 |
Parties & Counsel
| Petitioner | Aaron J. Gragg | Counsel | — |
|---|---|---|---|
| Respondent | Anthem Parkside at Merrill Ranch Community Association, Inc. | Counsel | Curtis Ekmark, Esq. |
Alleged Violations
CC&R Article 12.4(a)
A.R.S. § 33-1803
A.R.S. § 33-1805
CC&R 2.4(a)
Outcome Summary
The Petitioner's Petition, alleging four separate violations of Arizona statutes and CC&Rs (regarding ADR procedures, fraudulent violation assessment, failure to produce documents, and selective enforcement), was denied as the Petitioner failed to prove any of the alleged violations by a preponderance of the evidence.
Why this result: Petitioner failed to meet the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent violated A.R.S. § 33-1803, A.R.S. § 33-1805, or CC&R sections 2.4(a) and 12.4(a).
Key Issues & Findings
Refusal to participate in Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Petitioner alleged Respondent failed to comply with CC&R Article 12.4(a) regarding ADR. The ALJ found that CC&R Article 12.4(a) excluded proceedings initiated by the Association to enforce architectural, design, and landscape controls from mandatory arbitration.
Orders: Petitioner’s Petition is denied
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
- CC&Rs Section 12.4(a)
Fraudulent assessment of violations
Petitioner alleged Respondent assessed violations without observation. Evidence showed Petitioner’s landscape violations were observed during routine inspections by the Community Standards Administrator.
Orders: Petitioner’s Petition is denied
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
- A.R.S. § 33-1803
Failure to produce documents
Petitioner requested documents establishing design review requirements and enforcement authority. The ALJ found Petitioner’s requests were actually legal questions posed to Respondent regarding the CC&Rs, not requests for specific documents or records.
Orders: Petitioner’s Petition is denied
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
- A.R.S. § 33-1805
Selective Enforcement / Similar Treatment
Petitioner alleged selective enforcement because he was required to provide a photograph to prove compliance. The ALJ found Respondent has required photographic verification from other similarly situated non-compliant homeowners since 2010.
Orders: Petitioner’s Petition is denied
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
- CC&R Section 2.4(a)
Analytics Highlights
- A.R.S. § 33-1803
- A.R.S. § 33-1805
- A.R.S. § 32-2199 et seq.
- A.A.C. R2-19-119
- CC&Rs Section 12.4(a)
- CC&R Section 2.4(a)