ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final
2018A-3721-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2019-01-07
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
|So Cal Excavating, LLC, | | No. 2018A-3721-ROC | | | | | |COMPLAINANT | |ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE | | | |DECISION | |v. | | | | | | | |A Z A P General Contracting, LLC, | | | |License No: 247916 | | | | | | | | | | | |RESPONDENT. | | | | | | |
HEARING: December 13, 2018, 1:00 P.M. APPEARANCES: No appearance was made on behalf of Complainant; Jim Staheli and Kevin Poland, members, appeared on behalf of Respondent ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Roger A. Geddes _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT Background and Procedure 1. Complainant did not appear at the hearing; Jim Staheli and Kevin Poland, members, appeared on behalf of Respondent 2. The Notice of Hearing on this matter, dated November 6, 2018, and mailed to Complainant on or about that same date informed the parties that “[f]ailure to attend the scheduled hearing is likely to result in an adverse ruling against you.” 3. The Notice of Hearing further advised of the procedure for requesting a continuance of the hearing. 4. Although the commencement of the hearing was delayed approximately 20 minutes, Complainant did not appear at any time during the hearing through an authorized officer, employee, attorney, or any other person. Consequently, Complainant did not present any evidence against Respondent to warrant disciplinary action. Complainant further did not request to appear telephonically nor did it request that the hearing be continued. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The copy of the original Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Complainant at its address of record was reasonable and Complainant is deemed to have received notice of hearing. A.R.S. §§ 41- 1092.4 and 41-1092.05(D). 2. The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is by preponderance of the evidence. See Arizona Administrative Code Rule 2-19-119. By failing to appear at the hearing, Complainant did not meet the burden to present evidence in support of the Complaint. RECOMMENDED ORDER Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Registrar of Contractors’ Order, Complainant’s Complaint against Respondent be dismissed. 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, January 7, 2019.
/s/ Roger Geddes Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Jeffrey Fleetham, Director Registrar of Contractors
-----------------------
Office of Administrative Hearings 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826