ORDER

25F-H030-REL · Department of Real Estate - H/C · 2025-02-11

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Sharon M. Maiden,

Petitioner,

Val Vista Lakes Community Association,

Respondent.

No. 25F-H030-REL

ORDER DENYING MOTION

On January 27, 2025, this matter was referred by the Arizona Department of Real Estate (Department) to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings (Tribunal) for the conduct of an administrative hearing regarding the Petition dated December 15, 2024 filed by Petitioner with the Department.

On February 4, 2025, Respondent filed a Motion to Strike the Petition (Motion asking the Commissioner to strike the Petition and [now] decline to refer the matter for administrative hearing. Respondent argues that, pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2199.01(D), the Petition should have been considered to not be justified and, therefore, the Commissioner was not justified to refer Petition for administrative hearing.

On February 4, 2025, Petitioner responded in opposition to the Motion, arguing that the Motion lacks merit because Respondent has misapplied attorney-client privilege standards, disregards the Tribunal’s rules, and is an effort to deny Petitioner “her fundamental right to present relevant evidence at the administrative hearing.”

On February 4, 2025, Respondent replied, arguing that Petitioner, who is a former Board Member, does not have the right to disclose legal opinions prepared for the HOA or to break the attorney-client privilege that protects those communications. Respondent notes that the communications were disclosed during Board meetings but that the HOA has not given permission to Petitioner to disclose these, i.e., to attach the communications to her Petition.

On February 4, 2025, Petitioner filed her sur-reply, asking that the Commissioner reject the Motion and refer the Petition to the Tribunal for the parties to “follow the proper procedural rules and protect everyone’s rights.”

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED the Respondent’s Motion is denied. The Tribunal is authorized to hear the contested matters that are referred to the Tribunal and conducts the administrative hearings to determine whether evidence and arguments support the allegations. The arguments presented in the parties’ recent filings may be raised and heard at the time the administrative hearing is convened as a part of the hearing record to be considered for a final determination in the matter, or with agreement of an Administrative Law Judge as a pre-hearing possible dispositive matter.

ORDERED this day, February 11, 2025.

/s/ Kay A. Abramsohn

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Susan Nicolson

Commissioner

Arizona Department of Real Estate

Attn:

[email redacted]

Josh Bolen

CHDB Law LLP

[email redacted]

Counsel for Val Vista Lakes Community Association

Sharon M. Maiden

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff