ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-04870-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-09-10
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Northern Star Complete Construction Services LLC,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Dukes Development, LLC
License No. ROC 342305,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-04870-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: August 26, 2025 at 9:00am
APPEARANCES: James Walters on behalf of Complainant Northern Star Complete Construction Services, LLC. No appearance on behalf of Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing Packet (“Packet”).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Dukes Development, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 342305 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).
On or about May 15, 2025, Northern Star Complete Construction Services, LLC (“Complainant”) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $4,625.00 for remodeling projects.
The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. On June 12, 2025, the Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10).
Complainant began work on the remodeling project in October 2024. The total amount of the contract was $30,625.75. On October 3, 2024, Complainant received a payment from Respondent in the amount of $6,000.00. On December 2, 2024, Complainant received a payment from Respondent in the total amount of $6,000.00. On February 12, 2025, Complainant received a payment from the homeowner in the total amount of $5,000.00. On March 5, 2025, Complainant received a payment from homeowner in the amount of $3,800.00. The difference and outstanding amount owed to Complainant was $9,825.75.
In its Answer, Respondent wrote in part “[R]espondent has not received payment from the homeowner.” Respondent did not assert that it lacked the capacity to pay the amount Complainant asserted was due.
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 9:00am on August 26, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
On July 17, 2025, an Order was sent to the parties from the Office of Administrative Hearings which advised the parties how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet.
The hearing was held via Google Meet on August 26, 2025. Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed approximately 15 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any testimonial evidence to defend its license.
Hearing Evidence
James Walters, owner of Complainant business, testified on his own behalf. Mr. Walters testified that he was told by Respondent that he needs to seek payment from the homeowner. Mr. Walters stated that Complainant came to work with Respondent because Mr. Walter’s stepson’s father runs Respondent business. Mr. Walters testified that Respondent was the general contractor on the project and brought Complainant on as a subcontractor to perform remodeling work which consisted of drywall and paint. Mr. Walters testified that he was confused when filing the complaint and did not include the total amount that Complainant was owed.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
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 a preponderance of the evidence.
A preponderance of the evidence is “such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license,
[f]ailure by a licensee or agent or official of a licensee to pay monies in excess of $750 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's operations as a contractor unless the licensee proves that the licensee lacks the capacity to pay and has not received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.
The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent owed Complainant more than $750.00 for materials/services provided in connection with Respondent’s operations as a contractor.
Mr. Walters provided a thorough breakdown of all monies still owed to Complainant. As such, the evidence established that Respondent, as the general contractor, was responsible to make sure Complainant received the final payment of $9,825.75 and that was the amount still owed.
Respondent failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it lacked the ability to pay Complainant for the work performed.
Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $9,825.75 for services or materials rendered in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
Based upon Respondent’s violation of the provisions of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10), grounds exist to impose discipline against Respondent’s license
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing,
It is recommended that the Registrar suspend Respondent’s License No. ROC 342305 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $9,825.75 in certified funds.
It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $9,825.75 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2025-04870.
Pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
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 forty (40) days from the date of that certification.
Done this day, September 10, 2025.
/s/ Nicole Robinson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
c/o Legal Department
1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
Northern Star Complete Construction Services LLC
23301 N. 90th Dr.
Peoria, AZ 85383
[email redacted]
Dukes Development, LLC
3655 W Anthem Way Suite A 109-102
Phoenix, AZ 85086
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff