VACATE Vacate - originally document type was Order - changed during

98F-H0258-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-03-07

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

The Respondent has filed a second Motion to Dismiss and the Complainant has filed opposition thereto. Following a review of the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss, the Complainant’s response in opposition thereto, and after a full review of the entire file herein, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order are made:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Respondent’s first Motion to Dismiss was denied and the matter was continued so as to allow the conclusion of the parties’ civil suit involving the same issues set forth in the complaint at issue. 2. There is no dispute that the civil matter has now been concluded and that the civil court has issued a final judgment in the civil matter between the parties.. 3. Credible evidence of record establishes that the Complainant alleged the same issues in the civil action, breach of contract and fraud, that are set forth in the complaint at issue. 4. On January 27, 2000, the civil court issued Judgment granting the Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment and awarded Judgment, in the Respondent’s favor, on its counterclaim against the Complainant. 5. The issues in the complaint before the Registrar of Contractors involving fraud and breach of contract have been resolved, in the Respondent’s favor, by the judgment of the civil court. 6. A civil court of competent jurisdiction has now issued a judgment, in favor of the Respondent, disposing of the same issues set forth in the complaint at issue. These matters are now res judicata and the Registrar of Contractors is now estopped and precluded from ruling upon the same issues ruled upon by the civil court as any ruling by the Registrar of Contractors could be construed to be a collateral attack on the civil court judgment.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 6th Edition, defines res judicata as follows: “A matter adjudged, a thing judicially acted upon or decide, a thing or matter settled by judgment.” 2. The final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction generally precludes relitigation of the same issues between the same parties, regardless of the relative status of the two courts. Elder v. Holloway, 510 U>S> 510, 516 (1994). 3. Issue preclusion occurs when an issue to be litigated was actually litigated in a prior proceeding, final judgment was issued in the prior proceeding, the party against whom the doctrine was to be invoked had a full opportunity to litigate the issues, the party actually did litigate the issues and the issues were essential to the final judgment. Circle K Corp. v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 179 Ariz. 422, 880 P.2nd 642, 645 (App. 1993).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss be granted and that Citation No.H98-0258, together with the complaint upon which it is based, be dismissed.

Done this day, March 7, 2000.

______________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Copy mailed this ____ day of ______________, 2000, to:

Registrar of Contractors Attn.: Joyce Armijo 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

By ___________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826