ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2012A-2107-ROC-rhg · Registrar of Contractors · 2013-09-23

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: September 23, 2013, at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: Robert Smith (hereinafter “Complainant”) appeared on his own behalf. Cadiente Construction LLC (hereinafter “Cadiente”) appeared through its manager Brett Cadiente. 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. A copy of the parties’ written settlement agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed as follows: (1). Cadiente agreed to install new carpet and carpet pad in Complainant’s master bedroom. (2). Cadiente agreed to perform “touch-up” around Complainant’s kitchen door. (3). Cadiente agreed that all work was to be completed no later than October 31, 2013. (4). Complainant agreed to provide Cadiente reasonable access to his residence.

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 the parties 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).[1] 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 Director of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors for further disposition. Done this day, September 23, 2013.

/s/ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors

----------------------- [1] A.A.C. R2-19-119 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

An administrative law judge shall vacate a calendared hearing and return the matter to the agency for further action, if: 1. The parties agree to vacate the hearing; 4. Facts demonstrate to the administrative law judge that it is appropriate to vacate the hearing for the purpose of informal disposition, or if the action will further administrative convenience, expedition and economy and does not conflict with law or cause undue prejudice to any party.

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

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