ALJDEC - Licensing
2026A-01400-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-06-11
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
A & S Contracting LLC,
COMPLAINANT
v.
GEORGE H. PASTOR & SONS INC.
License No. ROC 338390,
RESPONDENT
No. 2026A-01400-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: May 28, 2026
APPEARANCES: Alejandro Stovall appeared on behalf of Complainant A & S Contracting LLC. Jackson C. Pittman, Esq. appeared on behalf of Respondent Geroge H. Pastor & Sons Inc.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Respondent’s Exhibits 1-6 were admitted into evidence.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
George H. Pastor & Sons Inc. (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 338390 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
On or about February 4 2026, A & S Contracting LLC (Complainant) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $208,840.89, for contracting services Complainant provided to Respondent in connection with Respondent’s contracting business on a Whataburger building.
The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. The Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) on February 25, 2026.
On March 12, 2026, Respondent timely e-mailed a Response to the Citation.
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 3:00 p.m. on May 28, 2026.
Alejandro Stovall appeared on behalf of Complainant, and testified that Complainant performed grading, asphalt paving, and aggregate base course placing, as well as other work on the Whataburger location. Mr. Stovall was aware that Respondent had issues with the project owner and was not being paid for the project, however, he questioned why there were no progress payments made.
Justin Harford, Project Manager, testified on behalf of Respondent. He testified that the parties’ contract expressly allowed payment only if Respondent was paid for the subcontracting work. Mr. Harford testified further, that almost immediately, Respondent encountered issues with Whataburger paying on the contract and has not received payment since approximately August 2025. In addition, Mr. Harford testified that all the change orders which included Complainant’s work, were never paid by Whataburger. Mr. Harford also testified that he made many attempts to secure payment for not only itself, but for a direct payment from Whataburger to the subcontractors, payment was not forthcoming. Further, Mr. Harford testified that because of the non-payment it filed a Mechanics Lien against the property. In sum, Mr. Harford testified that there were no issues with Complainant’s work, wanted to pay, and promised to pay once it got paid.
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. See A.A.C. R2-19-119.
A preponderance of the evidence is “such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).
A.R.S. § 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 evidence established that Respondent owed a total of $208,840.89. However, under the statute, and by Mr. Stovall’s own testimony, Respondent had not been paid by Whataburger for Complainant’s work. Therefore, according to the terms of the contract and statute, Respondent has a valid defense for non-payment.
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that the Registrar dismiss and close the Complaint in Case No. 2026-01400 against George H. Pastor & Sons Inc.’s License No: 338390.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 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, June 11, 2026.
/s/ Adam D. Stone
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
A & S Contracting LLC
[email redacted]
Jackson C. Pittman
HOLDEN WILLITS PLC
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff