ALJDEC

01F-2372-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2001-10-01

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|MICHAEL AND ARTEMISA MARTINEZ, | | Docket No. 01F-2372-ROC | |Complainants, | | | |-v- | |RECOMMENDED DECISION | |License No. 096788, Class B of | |OF ADMINISTRATIVE | |DICK LLOYD CUSTOM HOMES, INC., | |LAW JUDGE | |(CORP.), | | | |Respondent. | | | | | | |

HEARING: October 1, 2001 APPEARANCES: Neither Complainants Michael and Artemisa Martinez nor any person on their behalf arrived for the hearing. Qualifying Party Dick Lloyd appeared for Respondent Dick Lloyd Custom Homes, Inc., which was represented by Denise H. Troy, Esq. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Kay A. Abramsohn _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS 1. This matter was set for hearing, to be held on October 1, 2001, pursuant to the Notice of Hearing issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar). 2. On October 1, 2001, Complainant, Michael Martinez, faxed a letter, addressed to the Registrar of Contractors, to this Tribunal stating that he would be unable to attend the hearing set for October 1, 2001. Complainant stated that although he became ill Friday afternoon with food poisoning, he decided to wait until the morning of the hearing, to see if he would not be able to attend, to notify the Tribunal of his inability to appear at the hearing. Complainants letter states: “I realize this is short notice, but I did not plan on getting sick. I plan on calling to reschedule.”[1] 3. Complainant did not arrive at the scheduled time of the hearing, or for fifteen minutes after its scheduled start time. 4. Respondent moved to dismiss the matter because Complainants’ had not appeared to prove their case or, in the alternative, because the claim was asserted against the wrong party. 5. The Administrative Law Judge finds that Complainant’s letter dated October 1, 2001 did not state a specific motion for Continuance, but simply said Complainant “planned” to call to reschedule. Absent a clear request for continuance, the matter proceeded. CONCLUSIONS 1. Pursuant to Arizona law, the burden of proof regarding allegations made in the filed complaint and cited by the Registrar in the Registrar’s Citation and Complaint is on the Complainants. 2. By their default in appearance in this matter, Complainants have not met the burden of proof in this matter. RECOMMENDED ORDER Based on the foregoing, IT IS RECOMMENDED Respondent’s verbal Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED, and the Registrar’s Citation and Complainant No. 01-2372 be Dismissed, with no action taken on Respondent’s license. ORDERED and DATED this day, October 1, 2001.

______________________________________ Kay A. Abramsohn Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this ____ day of October 2001, to:

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors ATTN: Joyce Armijo 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

By _______________________________

----------------------- [1] Letter from Michael Martinez, October 1, 2001.

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 PH(602) 542-9826/FAX(602)542-9827