ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-10515-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-07-05

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Erin Zigabarra,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

J&M Construction and Design LLC,

ROC License No. 344487,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-10515-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: June 18, 2026 at 1:00 PM.

APPEARANCES: Erin Zigabarra (“Complainant”) appeared on her own behalf. Anthony Jackowiak appeared on behalf of J&M Construction and Design LLC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Jenna Clark.

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: The Notice of Hearing on Contested Case (“Notice of Hearing”), including the Registrar’s attached agency file, Registrar Supplemental Exhibit 1, Hearing Order issued April 30, 2026, and May 11, 2026, Continued Hearing Order were admitted into the evidentiary record.

_____________________________________________________________________

Having reviewed the hearing record in this matter, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and issues this Recommended Order to the Director of the Registrar.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Background and Procedure

Pursuant to Arizona Administrative Code (“Ariz. Admin. Code”) R4-9-117, Administrative Notice is taken of Respondent’s prior license record as reflected on the Registrar’s public website. On April 19, 2023, the Registrar issued License No. 344487 for General Dual KB-2 Residential and Small Commercial contracting to Respondent. The license is active and in good standing with the Registrar and has been renewed through April 30, 2027. Brenda Huthison is listed as the Qualifying Party and Manager on the license. Respondent’s address of record for the license is 1042 W. Oleander Ave. San Tan Valley, Arizona 85140. Respondent has a $14,000.00 active surety bond on the license issued by RLI Insurance Company, effective April 18, 2023. The license has previously been disciplined by the Registrar on one (1) prior occasion and has one (1) open complaint against it which is presumed to be related to the case at bar.

On October 13, 2025, the Registrar received an 8-item complaint from Complainant against Respondent’s License No. 344487 alleging abandonment and poor work regarding a residential remodel project. The Registrar designated it Complaint No. 2025-10515 and assigned it to Charles Riddlehoover (“Investigator Riddlehoover”) for investigation.

On October 13, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover issued a Warning Letter to Respondent for an alleged violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A) for Respondent’s alleged failure to include all nine (9) required minimum elements in his contracts, including his contract with Complainant. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.

On November 19, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover issued a Jobsite Inspection Notification Letter to the parties, advising that he would conduct an inspection of the project on December 02, 2025, at 11:30 a.m. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.

On December 02, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover inspected the work that had been performed on the project to date. Respondent was present. Investigator Riddlehoover also reviewed the contract-related correspondence between the parties, and took 17 photographs of the project site. Investigator Riddlehoover substantiated three (3) complaint items based on his firsthand observations. Specifically, Investigator Riddlehoover determined that complaint items 2, 4, and 7 required Respondent to perform corrective work sufficient to remedy the identified deficiencies, by appropriate means, or be held in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes (“Ariz. Rev. Stat.”) §§ 32-1154(A)(1) and 32-1154(A)(2)(a).

On December 15, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover issued a Written Directive from the Registrar (“Directive”) to Respondent due to his substantiation of some of Complainant’s complaint allegation(s) against License No. 344487. Respondent was put on notice that it had until 5:00 p.m. on January 05, 2026, to notify the Registrar of its compliance with the Directive or face discipline pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(22) and 32-1154(E). Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.

On February 23, 2026, Investigator Riddlehoover issued a Compliance Jobsite Inspection Notice to the parties, advising that he would conduct an inspection of the project on March 10, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.

On March 10, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover inspected the corrective work that had been performed on the project to date. Respondent was not present. Investigator Riddlehoover took 7 photographs of the project site. Ultimately, Investigator Riddlehoover determined that Respondent had not attempted to repair substantiated complaint items 2, 4, or 7.

On March 13, 2026, Investigator Riddlehoover forwarded the matter to the Registrar’s legal department with the issuance of a Citation Recommendation.

On March 18, 2026, the Registrar issued a Citation to Respondent for alleged violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(3); Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(A), and 32-1154(A)(22). Respondent was given until April 02, 2026, to respond with its Answer or face discipline pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(22) and 32-1155. Correspondence was not returned as undeliverable to Respondent.

On April 01, 2026, the Registrar received Respondent’s timely Answer whereby Ms. Hutchison argued that Respondent had made multiple attempts to schedule corrective work with Complainant to no avail, and that Investigator Riddlehoover failed to reply to their request for an extension of the Directive due to Complainant’s unresponsiveness.

On April 15, 2026, the Registrar referred this matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”), an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing on June 03, 2026. Per the April 24, 2026, Notice of Hearing the issues to be determined are whether the Registrar has cause to discipline Respondent’s license based on the following alleged statutory violations:

Charge 1: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) – A.A.C. R4-9-108(A)

Charge 2: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)

Hearing Evidence

Complainant testified on her own behalf and called Investigator Riddlehoover as a witness. Anthony Jackowiak testified on behalf of Respondent. The substantive evidence of record is as follows:

Complainant owns property located at 13121 W. El Cortez Pl. Peoria, Arizona 85383.

On or about March 02, 2025, the parties entered into a $4,536.23 residential remodel project. Complainant paid for the project in full.

Work on the project commenced on or about March 14, 2025, and stopped around April 04, 2025.

Between December 15, 2025, and January 05, 2026, License No. 344487 was active and in good standing with the Registrar. During that time Respondent did not perform any corrective work on the underlying project per requirements set forth in the Registrar’s Directive, request an extension of the Directive’s compliance period, or enter into a financial settlement agreement with Complaint by the end of the Directive’s compliance period.

At no point in time during the Directive’s compliance period did Respondent allege a denial of access to the project site.

Additional Evidence

Mr. Jackowiak is Ms. Hutchison’s spouse. Mr. Jackowiak held himself out as Respondent’s owner to Complainant. Per Mr. Jackowiak, he emailed Complainant on December 30, 2025, to schedule corrective work for January 03, 2026, but received no reply. On January 02, 2026, he emailed Complainant again with a proposal to commence corrective work on January 10, 2026, but did not receive a reply. Corroborative documentation was no provided to the Tribunal. Mr. Jackowiak testified that he did not report to the jobsite unannounced or otherwise uninvited because he resides 1hr 45mins away from the project site and did not want to be turned away. Mr. Jackowiak also offered that as of June/July 2025 he began a new over-the-road truck driving career and clarified that while Respondent had not “closed” it was no longer accepting new clients.

Investigator Riddlehoover testified that he had no communication with or on behalf of Respondent during the Directive’s compliance period, and that no denial of access allegations or extension requests were received during that period either.

Complainant testified that her first contact with Respondent after the Directive was issued was on January 02, 2026, whereby Respondent requested to perform corrective work on January 10, 2026.

Closing Arguments

In closing, Respondent argued that it had done everything in its power to rectify Complaint No. 2025-10515 but was unable to address it because of Complainant’s failure to communicate. As such, Respondent opined that License No. 344487 should not be subject to discipline.

In closing, Complainant argued that Respondent was unprofessional for taking her money and failing to deliver as promised or finish her project.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Registrar has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1101 et seq. and 32-1154(A). The matter was properly brought before OAH pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 41-1092 et seq.

The purpose of the Registrar’s licensing statutes is to protect the public from unscrupulous, unqualified, and financially irresponsible contractors.

The Registrar may resolve contractual disputes if such resolution in ancillary to its regulatory mission and may penalize a contractor’s license by ordering payment of restitution if a proven statutory violation was not remedied by corrective action.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish cause for the Registrar to discipline Respondent’s license by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent bears the burden to establish factors in mitigation of the penalty and affirmative defenses by the same evidentiary standard.

“A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” A preponderance of the evidence is “[t]he greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.”

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license, “[v]iolation of any rule adopted by the registrar.”

Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(A) requires that “[a] contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.”

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22) provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] holder of a license may not fail to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the registrar. The written directive shall set forth the time within which the contractor is to complete the remedial action. The time permitted for compliance shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of issuance of the directive. A license shall not be revoked or suspended nor shall any other penalty be imposed for a violation of this paragraph until after a hearing has been held. The Registrar has the authority to issue license discipline under this provision, including summary suspension, revocation, or imposing a civil penalty or recovery fund award.

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(E) holds, in pertinent parts, that the Registrar may “[i]mpose a civil penalty not to exceed five hundred dollars on a contractor for each violation. The failure by the licensee to pay any civil penalty imposed results in the automatic revocation of the license thirty days after the effective date of the order providing for the civil penalty. It also holds that no future license may be issued to an entity consisting of a person who is associated with the contractor, unless payment of any outstanding civil penalty is tendered.”

Statutes should be interpreted to provide a fair and sensible result.

Statutes shall be liberally construed to affect their objects and to promote justice.

The Tribunal is required to apply equitable principles when rendering decisions. The application of equity entails offering a remedy to avoid an unconscionable or unjust result.

The substantive facts of record in this matter are clear.

It is clear from the record that the parties had a residential remodel project that Complainant paid for in full, and that some of the work Respondent performed on the project failed to meet the Registrar’s minimum workmanship requirements. It is also clear that Respondent was specifically instructed by the Registrar via the Directive to remediate substantiated complaint items 2, 4, and 7, and that Respondent failed to comply. It is also undisputed that Respondent did not enter into a settlement agreement with Complainant.

Therefore, the only remaining issue to address is whether Respondent raised sufficient justification or excuse for failing to address the Registrar’s Directive or ask for an extension prior to the expiration of the corrective order’s compliance period. These are affirmative defenses that Respondent bears the burden to establish. The Tribunal is not at liberty to make presumptions in favor of Respondent or accept facts in mitigation on behalf of Respondent that are not supported by the evidence. Here, the record reflects that Respondent failed to act in any degree and had no affirmative defense(s) for doing so. Respondent did not provide an indicia of evidence to support Mr. Jackowiak’s assertions to the contrary. There is no exigent or otherwise mitigating evidence in favor of Respondent in the record.

because the credible evidence of record supports a finding that Complainant established Respondent’s statutory violation(s) of Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(3) and 32-1154(A)(22) by a preponderance of the evidence, Complainant has also established cause for the Registrar to discipline License No. 344487.

Complainant may petition the Registrar’s Recovery Fund for financial recompense in this matter.

ORDER

In consideration of the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED that five days after the effective date of the Final Order in this matter, Respondent J&M Construction and Design LLC, License No. 344487, be suspended five (5) days based on its violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(3) and 32-1154(A)(22).

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum total of two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(E).

It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty days following the effective date of the Registrar’s Order, the Registrar revoke Respondent’s license, effective on such deadline date. No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1101(A)(5), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

NOTICE

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, July 06, 2026.

Office of Administrative Hearings

/s/ Jenna Clark

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Tom Cole, Director

c/o Legal Department

Registrar of Contractors

1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105

Phoenix, AZ 85007

[email redacted]

Erin Zigabarra, Complainant

13121 W. El Cortez Pl.

Peoria, AZ 85383

[email redacted]

J&M Construction and Design LLC, Respondent

c/o Brenda Hutchinson, Agent

1042 W. Oleander Ave.

San Tan Valley, AZ 85140

[email redacted]

J&M Construction and Design LLC, Respondent

c/o Anthony Jackowiak, Agent

1534 W. Agrarian Hills Dr.

Queen Creek, AZ 85143

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff