Minute Entry - FYI Advisement to Parties
2023A-13234-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-03-01
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Darcie Shanklin,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Adam Crippen Custom Home Works LLC
ROC License No. 314299,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2023A-13234-CHC-ROC
Minute Entry
On January 22, 2024, the Arizona Registrar of Contractors issued a Notice of Hearing in the above-captioned matter which set the matter for hearing on March 04, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. before the Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”), an independent state agency, in Phoenix, Arizona. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.
On January 30, 2024, the Tribunal electronically issued a Hearing Order to the parties that provided remote participation information for the scheduled hearing. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.
On February 22, 2024, attorney Brenda J. Lee, Esq. of the law firm Lee & Travers PLC submitted a Notice of Appearance and Motion to Continue Hearing to OAH that was inadvertently flagged as solely being a motion to continue. The motion was only provided to Complainant via postal mail, despite her email address being provided to Respondent in the Hearing Order issued January 30, 2024.
On February 29, 2024, OAH received a telephone call on behalf of Respondent to inquire whether the Tribunal had ruled on the pending motion to continue, and further inquired if counsel should submit the motion separately.
Later on February 29, 2024, OAH electronically forwarded Respondent’s motion to continue to Complainant, who in turn filed a written objection on March 01, 2024, in pertinent part, as follows:
The March 4, 2024, hearing was originally set on January 22, 2024, it is now three days prior to the hearing date. A delay would be extremely prejudicial to us, our family and household. Our elderly parents are living with us. We have not had a functional kitchen for months and we are without electricity in two other rooms in our home. This extreme inconvenience has been ongoing since November 16, 2023 to the present date. Waiting another two months will result in additional hardship.
Mr. Crippen has had ample time to retain an attorney and have that attorney prepared for the hearing. Mr. Crippen consistently delays in his responses to the various scheduled written deadlines in this matter. The record in this matter reflects the same.
The law firm of Brenda J. Lee & Travers PLC appears to have additional attorneys in the firm, perhaps another attorney would be available to substitute for Ms. Lee in this matter.
As a result, on March 01, 2024, the Tribunal denied Respondent’s motion to continue as good cause had not been established. Later that same date, instead of filing a Motion for Reconsideration with additional compelling information, Lee & Travers PLC submitted a Notice of Withdrawal of Representation to OAH, which argued in relevant part that Respondent “could not then and cannot now be prepared to defend Respondent at the hearing.” While the Tribunal does not agree with the contention, it does accept notice of withdrawal. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED accepting Lee & Travers PLC withdrawal as counsel for record for the above-captioned matter.
Done this day, March 01, 2024.
Office of Administrative Hearings
/s/ Jenna Clark
Administrative Law Judge
Copy mailed/e-mailed/faxed to:
Tom Cole, Director
c/o John Smith, Investigator
Registrar of Contractors
1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
Darcie Shanklin, Complainant
6641 N. Amahl Pl.
Tucson, AZ 85704
[email redacted]
Adam Crippen Custom Home Works LLC, Respondent
2190 N. Ironwood Crest Dr.
Tucson, AZ 85745
[email redacted]
Courtesy copy to:
Brenda J. Lee, Esq.
Lee & Travers PLC
2421 E. 6th St., Unit 1
Tucson, AZ 85719
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff