ALJDEC

99F-0624-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-05-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: May 18, 1999 at 9:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: Complainant appeared through her attorney, William D. Shostak, Esq.; Respondent appeared through its vice president and owner, Steve W. Tillotson. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Diane Mihalsky _____________________________________________________________________

The parties presented evidence and testimony on the issue of Respondent’s alleged failure to perform warranty work and, by the end of the hearing, agreed to settle this complaint. Based upon the entire record, the undersigned makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The parties confirmed to the administrative law judge that they had concluded a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were read onto the record. Pursuant to the provisions of the parties’ settlement agreement, Respondent agreed to pay or tender, and Complainant agreed to accept, a specified total monetary amount. Respondent also agreed to perform certain specified warranty work. These undertakings are in full satisfaction of the complaint presently pending before the Registrar of Contractors. Complainant agreed to withdraw her complaint and to consent to the entry of an order dismissing the citation and complaint and agreed that she would not file a complaint in a court having appropriate jurisdiction against Respondent for any civil claims based on the statutory violations alleged in the complaint. However, the dismissal of this administrative action is without prejudice to the filing of a new complaint if Respondent breaches the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement. These administrative disciplinary proceedings are cut short by the parties’ entry into the settlement agreement, which is presented to the Registrar of Contractors for approval and adoption. Consequently, Respondent is advised that any future breach of the terms of the settlement agreement will not only constitute grounds for a new complaint but also will warrant treatment as a circumstance in aggravation. All rights and defenses of the parties are deemed to have been merged into the settlement agreement and, if any timely petition for rehearing or 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 settlement agreement. The terms of the foregoing settlement agreement are fair and reasonable, under all the circumstances, and the agreement is the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Public policy favors settlement of disputes and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements or stipulations. 2. The settlement reached and submitted following the hearing of this matter, having been found to be reasonable and voluntarily made, warrants termination of the hearing and dismissal of the charges contained in the Citation and Complaint.

/ / / /

/ / / / RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Registrar dismiss the Citation and Complaint in Case No. 99-0624. Done this day, May 18, 1999.

______________________________________ Diane Mihalsky Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of May, 1999, to:

Registrar of Contractors Mr. Michael P. Goldwater 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