Vacate

08F-A0202-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2009-03-10

STATE OF ARIZONA IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

This matter first convened for hearing via videoconference on November 25, 2008. At that time, it was determined that no Minute Entry had been issued by the Office of Administrative Hearings advising the parties to pre-submit their exhibits for the videoconference hearing. As a result, the hearing was continued until January 9, 2009. The parties did not conclude the presentation of evidence at the January 9, 2009 continued hearing and the matter was set for further hearing on April 8 and 9, 2009 pursuant to this tribunal’s January 21, 2009 Order Re: Further Hearing Dates. On January 23, 2009, Complainants, by and through counsel, Douglas J. Suits, filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Request for Continuance of Further Hearing (“motion to continue”) the basis for which was the need for Mr. Suits to recover from a significant medical procedure which made uncertain his ability to appear at the scheduled further hearing. By Minute Entry dated January 27, 2009, the undersigned provided Respondent until February 3, 2009 to file a response to Complainants’ motion to continue. On February 3, 2009 Respondent, by and through counsel, filed Respondent’s Response to Complainants’ Motion to Continue (“response”) where it set forth four bases upon which it objected to any continuance including the assertion that Complainant retained an attorney with a known possible conflict. On February 4, 2009, this tribunal issued its Order Denying Continuance. On March 5, 2009, Complainant Thomas Brancati s filed via email with the Office of Administrative Hearings the attached correspondence wherein he related that he would “like to have my claim vacated” for two reasons, i.e., the fact that Respondent has no license and “cannot fix the open items on my contract…nor can he be forced to pay for the fixes” and I have been denied the attorney of my choice due to conflict with hearing date and medical issue.”[1] For purposes of this matter and based on the content thereof, Complainants’ motion will be deemed to be a motion to vacate the instant hearing pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-111(4). Based on the foregoing, and sufficient cause otherwise appearing, IT IS ORDERED that the further hearing in this matter set for April 8 and 9, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. via videoconference be and hereby is VACATED from the calendar of the Office of Administrative Hearings; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be remanded to the Registrar of Contractors for further appropriate action. Done this day, March 10, 2009.

_______________________ Brian E. Smith Administrative Law Judge

Copy mailed this ____ day of ______________, 2009 to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors c/o Legal Department 3838 N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85012

Standing Rock, LLC P.O. Box 11088 Prescott, AZ 86304

The Commercial Transaction Enforcement Bureau, LLC 5134 N. Central Avenue, #100 Phoenix, AZ 85012

Douglas J. Suits, Esq. Suits Law Firm, PLC 224 North Marina St. Prescott, Arizona 86301-0001

Thomas Brancati Patricia Brancati 2184 Forest Mountain Road Prescott, AZ 86303

Robert S. Porter, Esq. PORTER LAW FIRM Porter Law Firm 7243 N. 16th Street Phoenix, AZ 85020

By __________________________ ----------------------- [1] It must be noted that in its Order Denying Continuance this tribunal explained that Complainants’ motion to continue was denied due to Mr. Suits’ apparent acceptance of representation of Complainants with knowledge of the further hearing dates and a potential conflict therewith due to his pending medical procedure.

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

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