ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

07F-M2144-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2008-04-10

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: April 1, 2008. APPEARANCES: Vince Castagna did not appear. Lion Investments of Arizona, LLC was represented by its member and qualifying party, Seth Francl. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Brian Brendan Tully _____________________________________________________________________ Based upon the entire record in this matter, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order:

1. Lion Investments of Arizona, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. 215095, a Class C-21 contracting license, issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). 2. Vince Castagna (“Complainant”) hired Respondent to perform work at his residence in Maricopa, Arizona. 3. Complainant subsequently filed a written Complaint with the Registrar alleging statutory and regulatory violations by Respondent on his project. 4. In response to the filed Complaint against Respondent, the Registrar issued a Citation and Complaint in Case No. M07-2144 alleging possible violations by Respondent of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (1), (7) and (3); namely A.A.C. R4-9-108. 5. The Registrar referred the Citation and Complaint in Case No. M07-2144 to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent agency, for formal hearing. 6. The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing in Case No. M07-2144 advising the parties of the time, date and location of the formal hearing. A copy of the Notice of Hearing was sent to the parties at their addresses of record with the Registrar. 7. The commencement of the scheduled hearing was delayed 15 minutes to allow for the late arrival of Complainant, or an authorized representative for him. After the delay, the hearing was conducted in Complainant’s absence. 8. By his failure to appear at the scheduled hearing, Complainant failed to present any evidence to support the factual basis for the Citation and Complaint in Case No. M07-2144. 9. There is no evidence that the parties entered into a settlement agreement prior to the scheduled hearing.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Registrar has jurisdiction over Respondent and the subject matter in this case. 2. Pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-119(B), Complainant has the burden of proof in this matter. The standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence. A.A.C. R2-19-119(A). 3. By his default in appearance at the hearing, Complainant failed to sustain his burden of proving that Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (1), (7) and (3); namely A.A.C. R4-9-108, as cited in the Citation and Complaint issued by the Registrar in Case No. M07-2144.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

The Citation and Complaint in Case No. M07-2144 shall be dismissed on the effective date of the Order entered in that matter. In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be 40 days from the date of that certification. Done this day, April 10, 2008

Done this day, April 10, 2008

______________________________________ Brian Brendan Tully Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2008, to:

Fidelis V. Garcia, Director Registrar of Contractors 3838 N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85012

By ___________________________

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

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