VACATE

99F-264-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-04-19

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

This matter was brought on for administrative hearing Wednesday, March 15th, 2000, at 1:45 p.m., after having been duly noticed to convene at 1:30 p.m. on that date. Plaintiff was present, represented by his designated representative, Ms. Dorothy Levinson. Defendant failed to appear or be represented. The Registrar of Contractors, Residential Recovery Fund, was represented by Ms. Marjorie Becklund, Assistant Attorney General. Defendant having failed to appear, there was only one issue presented at the hearing. The plaintiff’s claim on the recovery fund was being questioned by the fund on the basis that the information possessed by the fund’s representatives up to the time of the hearing led them to conclude that plaintiff might not be entitled to recovery from the fund. The reasoning went that plaintiff had not demonstrated that he had paid in full on his account with the defendant, and the amount claimed from the fund was less than the balance he seemed to owe on the contract. Thus it had appeared to the fund’s representatives up to the time the hearing was convened, that plaintiff would realize a net gain if awarded a claim from the fund. As claimants to the fund’s resources are eligible to recover only actual damages, so continued the argument, plaintiff would not be entitled to a recovery. Shortly after the call of the case, and before the first witness was sworn, or any other evidence admitted to record, it became clear that the plaintiff had brought with him to the hearing room additional documents he wished to be considered as evidence that he had, in fact, paid more on the contract than the fund’s representatives had apprehended up to that time. A recess was called in order to allow the lawyer for the fund to peruse these documents, so that she could respond. Following the recess, the fund’s attorney moved to recess the hearing for further hearing, based on the plaintiff’s provision of additional documentation which needed more time to be considered. The motion was granted and the hearing recessed. An order issued setting this matter for further hearing on April 26th, 2000. A motion to vacate the further hearing was filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings by the attorney representing the fund on April 17th, 2000. The ground for the motion is that the fund and the plaintiff have entered into a settlement agreement, which adopted by the Registrar of Contractors after notice to the contractor, would resolve all matters pertaining to this case. A copy of the signed settlement agreement, signed by plaintiff and counsel for the fund was attached to the motion. The settlement is that plaintiff receives $711.39 from the fund. Wherefore, and pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-111.1., and .4, the motion to vacate the further hearing is granted, and the hearing date of April 26th, 2000, is canceled. It is further ordered that this matter is returned to the Registrar of Contractors for further action with a recommendation for finalization in accordance with the settlement agreement of the parties.

Done this day, April 19th, 2000.

_________________________________ Grant Winston Administrative Law Judge

Copy transmitted by mail this _____ day of _________, 2000, to:

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

Sam Weiner 336 S. Paseo Chico Green Valley, AZ 85614

Office of the Attorney General Janet Napolitano Marjorie S. Becklund Assistant Attorney General 400 West Congress, S-315 Tucson, AZ 85701

Seal Building, Inc. 3027 N. Geronimo Tucson, AZ 85705

Seal Building, Inc. 585 W. Hawk Way Amado, AZ 85645

Registrar of Contractors Attn: Jim Morris 400 W. Congress, Suite 212 Tucson, AZ 85701

By _______________________________

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

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 North Stone Avenue, Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488