ALJDEC

00F-2522-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-12-08

STATE OF ARIZONA IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: December 8, 2000.

APPEARANCES: Complainants appeared in their own behalf. Respondent was represented by its attorney, Blake E. Whiteman, Esq.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Robert I. Worth _____________________________________________________________________

Based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At the outset of the scheduled hearing, a request on behalf of Complainant was granted to amend the complaint, citation and case caption in this matter by adding Sharon Lewis, who is the wife of Mayor Shanken and a co-owner of the residence that was the subject of this administrative action, as an additional Co-Complainant in this case.

2. Shortly after the formal opening of the hearing, and following a much prolonged recess during which the parties discussed all matters in issue, the parties confirmed to the Administrative Law Judge that they had concluded a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were read onto the record.

3. Pursuant to the provisions of the parties’ settlement agreement, Respondent agreed to properly perform certain described additional work on the jobsite no later than a stated deadline date, also agreeing to provide color samples for a selection by Complainants in advance of the work. In the event that the parties are unable to agree on the results of the stipulated additional work, both parties further agreed to be bound by a subsequent determination as to conformity with the settlement terms and with acceptable industry standards as made and communicated by the Registrar’s assigned Inspector. Complainant also agreed to withdraw its complaint presently pending before the Registrar of Contractors and to consent to the entry of an Order closing the within Citation, further agreeing to grant reasonable and timely access to the premises for Respondent or its representatives. Complainants additionally agreed to make prompt color selections from samples provided and also to remit the stipulated monetary balance payable under the contract within a short fixed time after either their acceptance of the work or the Inspectors approval of same.

4. The administrative disciplinary proceedings hereunder are effectively cut short by the entry into the above-described settlement agreement which is to be presented to the Registrar of Contractors for approval and adoption. Consequently, Respondent must be and hereby is advised that any future breach of the additional work terms of the settlement agreement will not only constitute grounds for the filing of a timely petition for rehearing or of a new complaint but also shall warrant treatment as a circumstance in aggravation.

5. All rights and defenses of the respective parties are deemed to have been merged into the settlement agreement, and if any timely petition for rehearing of this matter is to be filed and granted, or if any new complaint is filed in the future, the sole issue for determination shall be whether Respondent has performed its obligations under the terms of the aforesaid settlement agreement

6. It was mutually understood that the entry by the respective parties into the settlement agreement was without any admission of fault, liability or obligation on the part of Respondent, and correspondingly without any admission by Complainants that they were not entitled to greater benefits.

7. The terms of the foregoing settlement agreement appeared to be fair and reasonable under all the circumstances, and the agreement was determined to be the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The policy of the law favors settlements of disputes, and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements or stipulations which should be recognized and given effect by all tribunals.

2. The settlement reached and submitted during the hearing of this matter, having been found to be reasonable and voluntarily made, warrants the termination of the instant hearing and the closing of the charges contained in the Citation and Complaint.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the entire Citation and Complaint, as amended, in Case No. 00-2522 be closed.

December 12, 2000.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

______________________________________ Robert I. Worth Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted on _____________________

by: _____________________________ , to:

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors 800 West Washington Street (6th Floor) Phoenix, AZ 85007

Attn: Joyce Armijo -----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826