ALJDEC
02F-A0126-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2002-04-02
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
|M and M Roofing, | | Case No.: A02-0126 | | | |Docket No.: 02F-A0126-ROC | |Complainant, | | | |-v- | | | | | |RECOMMENDED DECISION OF | |License No. 111858, Class B-02 of | |ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE | |Canyon Services, Inc. (Corp), | | | | | | | |Respondent. | | | | | | |
HEARING: Wednesday, March 27th, 2002; 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The complainant, M and M Roofing, failed to appear. The respondent, Canyon Services, Inc., was represented by its president, Mr. Morgan Stine. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Grant Winston. _____________________________________________________________________
This matter was heard by the Office of Administrative Hearings in Prescott, Arizona. The case was duly scheduled and noticed to convene at 8:30 a.m. The respondent appeared, but the complainant failed to appear. The case was called at 8:45 a.m. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This matter was duly scheduled for administrative hearing in Prescott, Arizona, for Wednesday, March 27th, 2002, at 8:30 a.m. The respondent appeared at the appointed time through its president, Mr. Morgan Stine. The complainant failed to appear. An additional 15 minutes was allowed by the judge before he called the case. 2. Notice of the hearing was duly given both parties. 3. Complainant, in failing to appear, failed to present any evidence in support of his claim against the respondent. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. §32-1156 and A.R.S. §41-1092. 2. The complainant has brought this complaint and accordingly must bear the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence (more than 50%) that the allegations contained therein are true. A.A.C. R2-19-119. See also: Culpepper v. State, 187 Ariz. 431, 930 P.2d 508 (Ct. App. 1996); Smith v. Arizona Department of Transportation, 146 Ariz. 430, 706 P.2d 756 (App. 1985) (the standard of proof is that of the “preponderance of evidence”).
3. Consequently the record does not support any conclusion that the respondent has violated any provision of A.R.S. §32-1154.A. as set forth in the instant citation and complaint. RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing it is hereby recommended that Citation and Complaint Number A02-0126, together with the complaint on which it is based, be dismissed. Done this day, April 9th, 2002.
________________________________ GRANT WINSTON Administrative Law Judge
Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of April, 2002, to:
Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors ATTN: Joyce Armijo 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007
By _______________________________ -----------------------
Office of Administrative Hearings 100 N. Stone Ave., Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488