ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

07F-T1228-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2008-03-19

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: March 13th, 2008; 9:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: Complainant, Mr. Robert Haugen, represented himself. Respondent, MTN Enterprise, Inc., doing business as Nicholas Building Company, was represented by Mr. Michael Nicholas, President. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Grant Winston The administrative hearing of this matter was held in the Office of Administrative Hearings, Tucson. Testimony was heard and other evidence admitted to the record, and, based on the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent herein, MTN Enterprise, Inc., doing business as Nicholas Building Company, is, and during all time material hereto was, a contractor licensed by and doing business in the State of Arizona, holding Class B License 096011. 2. Complainant, Mr. Robert Haugen, performed carpentry work at a project in Tucson, Arizona, to build 42 town homes. The owner of Respondent company also owns the company that was the general contractor on the project in question. Paychecks from this Respondent were paid to this Complainant for the project in question. 3. A dispute arose between the parties as to both how much money should have been paid from Respondent to Complainant under their working relationship, and even what was their working relationship. 4. Complainant contends that he was working on the project as a mechanic performing carpentry labor. Respondent contends that Complainant was an hourly employee. 5. Apart from not agreeing on the nature of their working relationship, these parties are in sharp dispute over whether Respondent owes Complainant money for his work on the project in question. 6. Being unable to resolve these issues, Complainant filed the instant Complaint with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors. 7. It appears from the record as a whole that these parties have a good faith monetary and/or contract dispute which would be more properly resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This administrative hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. 32-1156, and A.R.S. 41-1092. 2. Respondent is charged in the instant Citation and Complaint with possible violations of A.R.S. 32-1154.A.7, and 11. 3. A good faith monetary and/or contract dispute, absent evidence of other wrongdoing, does not warrant disciplinary action upon a licensee. See: Bentivegna v. Powers Steel & Wire Products, Inc., 206 Ariz. 581, 81 P.3d 1040 (Ariz. App. Div. 1, 2003). RECOMMENDED ORDER The parties have a good faith monetary and/or contract dispute which should be more properly resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction. Wherefore, it is hereby recommended that Citation and Complaint No. T07-1228 be dismissed on the effective date of this Order (40 days after the date of service appearing on the Registrar’s certification on the Order). In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, then the effective date of the Order shall be 40 days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, March 19th, 2008.

______________________________________ Grant Winston Administrative Law Judge

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

Registrar of Contractors Fidelis V. Garcia 3838 N. Central Ave., Ste. 400 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1906

By ___________________________ -----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 N. Stone Avenue, Suite 704 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 628-5488 www.azoah.com