Vacate: Settlement Recommendation

2011A-1466-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-11-03

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: November 3, 2011, at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared through his attorney, Brenda Lee. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Jerry Crawford. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

The following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order are made: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. During the scheduled hearing, the parties manifested movement in the direction of a resolution of the matter at issue. Therefore, the parties were afforded the opportunity to craft a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were stated for the record. 2. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent agreed to perform a complete electrical inspection of the Complainant’s residence. The parties agreed that if any deficiencies were found the Respondent would meet with the Complainant’s construction expert, Mr. Rosenberg, to determine which deficiencies should be corrected as warranty work and which deficiencies would be corrected as new work to be paid for by the Complainant. The Complainant agreed to cause the tile around the electrical fixtures and the electrical fixtures in the kitchen area to be removed and then to have the tile reinstalled. The Respondent agreed to then install new electrical fixtures over the new tile in the kitchen area. 3. The Complainant agreed to withdraw the complaint at issue and agreed to the closing of the instant citation. 4. The parties acknowledged that they understood the terms of their Settlement Agreement and that they had entered into the Settlement Agreement voluntarily and in good faith. 5. This tribunal finds that the terms of the Settlement Agreement are reasonable under the circumstances and that the Settlement Agreement was the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party thereto. 6. In light of having entered into the Settlement Agreement, Complainant and Respondent agreed to vacate the hearing in this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A general policy of law favors the settlement of disputes and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements and stipulations of settlement which should be recognized and given effect by the tribunal having jurisdiction over the issues and statutory enforcement authority. 2. Termination of the instant hearing is mandated by the parties having entered into the Settlement Agreement, as well as having agreed to vacate the hearing. A.A.C.R2-19-111(1) and (4). ORDER Pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-111(1) and (4), it is ordered vacating the hearing in this matter and remanding this matter to the Registrar for further disposition. Done this day, November 3, 2011. _________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Copy transmitted by mail this _____ Day of _________, 2011 to:

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

Crawford Electric Inc PO Box 91608 Tucson, AZ 85752-1608

V C Karumanchi 4750 E. Calle Chueca Tucson, AZ 85718-7221

Brenda J. Lee Lee & Travers PLC 2421 East 6th Street, Suite 1 Tucson, AZ 85719

By _______________________________

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

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