ALJDEC

98F-2313-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1998-10-09

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

The above matter came on for hearing on August 18, 1998 and was scheduled for further hearing on October 13, 1998. At the initial hearing session, the Complainant appeared through its President and qualifying party, Glen Messinger and the Respondent appeared though its owner and qualifying party, Julian Mortensen Sanders.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Shortly prior to the date set for the further hearing in this matter, Complainant confirmed to the Administrative Law Judge in writing that both parties had concluded a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were contained in a written document filed with this tribunal.

2. Pursuant to the provisions of the parties’ settlement agreement, Respondent agreed to perform certain specified work on the jobsite prior to a stated deadline date, and Complainant agreed to withdraw its filed complaint, as amended, as well as to consent to the entry of an Order closing the within Citation.

3. The administrative disciplinary proceedings hereunder are effectively cut short by the parties’ entry into the above-described settlement agreement which is, in effect, being presented to the Registrar of Contractors for approval and adoption. Consequently, Respondent must be and hereby is advised that any future breach of the corrective work terms of the settlement agreement will not only constitute grounds for the filing of a new complaint but also shall warrant treatment as a circumstance in aggravation.

4. All rights and defenses of the respective parties are deemed to have been merged into the settlement agreement, and if any timely petition for rehearing of this matter is to be filed and granted, or if any new complaint is filed in the future, the sole issue for determination shall be whether Respondent has performed its obligations under the terms of the aforesaid settlement agreement

5. The terms of the foregoing settlement agreement appear to be fair and reasonable under all the circumstances, and the agreement further appears to have been the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The policy of the law favors settlements of disputes, and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements or stipulations which should be recognized and given effect by all tribunals.

2. The settlement reached and submitted prior to the convening of the further hearing in this matter, having been found to be reasonable and voluntarily made, warrants the vacating of the scheduled further hearing and the closing of the charges and amended charges contained in the Citation and Complaint.

ORDER AND RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the further hearing date of October 13, 1998 be vacated from the calendar of the Office of Administrative Hearings, and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be remanded to the Registrar of Contractors with the recommendation that the entire Citation and Complaint, as amended, in Case No. 98-2313 be closed.

Dated: October 13, 1998.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ Robert. I. Worth Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted on _____________________

by: _____________________________ , to:

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

ATTN: Joyce Armijo -----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1700 West Washington, Suite 602 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826