ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2016A-4109-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2017-04-10

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Joseph J and Dorothy E Hessel,

COMPLAINANTS,

v.

Daniel Mark Henderson

DBA: Daniel M Henderson,

License No: 165089, 191093

RESPONDENT.

No. 2016A-4109-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: April 10, 2017, at 8:30 a.m.

APPEARANCES: Joseph J. and Dorothy E. Hessel (“Complainants”) failed to appear; Daniel Mark Henderson DBA: Daniel M. Henderson (“Respondent”) appeared on his own behalf.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Diane Mihalsky

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“the Registrar”) issued License Nos. 165089 and 191093 to Respondent.

The Registrar received a complaint against Respondent from Complainants. Complainant provided their mailing address on the complaint form.

The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings (“the OAH”), an independent State agency, for an evidentiary hearing.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing on February 15, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. at the OAH. The Notice of Hearing advised the parties that “[f]ailure to attend the scheduled hearing is likely to result in an adverse ruling against you.”

On February 14, 2017, Respondent requested that the hearing be continued because he wife had experienced a medical emergency. Complainants did not oppose the requested continuance. The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) continued the hearing to March 24, 2017.

After Complainants informed the ALJ that they were not available on March 24, 2017, the ALJ issued another order continuing the hearing until April 10, 2017, at 8:30 a.m.

On April 9, 2017, Complainants informed the ALJ that they were not able to attend the April 10, 2017 hearing because they could no longer take any additional time away from work to resolve the matter.

Respondent appeared at the April 10, 2017 hearing. Complainants did not request to appear telephonically, did not appear personally or through an attorney, and did not contact the OAH to request another continuance or that the start of the hearing be further delayed. Consequently, Complainants did not present any evidence to prosecute their complaint to the Registrar against Respondent.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The order continuing the hearing at Complainants’ request that OAH mailed to them at the address that they provided was reasonable and it appears that Complainants received actual notice of the second continued hearing.

Complainants bear the burden of proof to establish that Respondent violated the charged provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) by a preponderance of the evidence.

Complainants by failing to appear or to present any evidence at the duly noticed second continued hearing failed to meet their burden to establish that Respondent violated the charged statutes.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the final order, the Registrar dismiss Complainants Joseph J. and Dorothy E. Hessell’s complaint in Case 2016-4109 against Respondent Daniel Mark Henderson DBA: Daniel M. Henderson’s License Nos. 165089 and 191093.

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 five days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, April 10, 2017.

/s/ Diane Mihalsky

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Jeffrey Fleetham, Director

Registrar of Contractors