Enclave Villas Condominium Council Of Co-owners INC v. Thomas C Tracy - CV2017-002958

Enclave Villas Condominium Council of Co-Owners Inc v. Thomas C. Tracy (Case No. CV 2017-002958), litigated in the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, before Judge Karen A. Mullins, began in early 2017 and concluded in May 2018 [1, 2]. The case involved a legal dispute between the condominium council (Plaintiff) and Defendant Thomas C. Tracy [1]. Key Facts and Procedural History The litigation was marked by several procedural maneuvers and delays: Default and Pleadings Disputes: In March 2017, the Plaintiff e-filed an Application/Motion for Default Judgment, but the court took no action because Arizona court rules required default packets to be hand-delivered rather than e-filed [1, 3, 4]. In May 2017, the court denied the Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, noting that Tracy's defense—claiming the sought changes were "erroneous" and "violate collection laws"—was sufficient to defeat the motion [5, 6]. Tracy's answer also made the Plaintiff's application for default judgment ineffective [6]. Dismissal Calendar: In August 2017, after the Plaintiff filed a solo joint report, the court ordered the parties to coordinate and submit an amended report by September 11, 2017 [7, 8]. When the Plaintiff failed to meet this deadline, the court placed the case on the dismissal calendar with a dismissal date of October 31, 2017, unless the report was filed [9, 10]. Motion to Dismiss and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): After scheduling was resolved, the court referred the case to ADR for a settlement conference before a Judge Pro Tempore [11, 12]. Although the deadline to complete this conference was extended to April 2018 due to a clerical error [13, 14], the conference was conducted but did not lead to a settlement [15]. Meanwhile, in January 2018, the court denied Tracy's Motion to Dismiss because his arguments relied on facts outside the pleadings, though he was granted leave to file a motion for summary judgment [16, 17]. Trial Preparation and Defendant’s Absence: In March 2018, the court scheduled a one-day bench trial for May 2, 2018, and set a final trial management conference for April 13, 2018 [15, 18]. At the April 13 conference, Tracy failed to appear, prompting the court to discuss his absence and grant the Plaintiff an extension of time to file trial exhibits [19, 20]. Main Issues The primary legal issues in the case centered on: Validity of HOA Actions: Tracy contested the "changes sought" by the condominium council, asserting that they were "erroneous" and violated relevant collection laws [6]. Procedural Adherence: Both sides struggled with court protocols, leading to rejected default filings, missed scheduling deadlines, and temporary placement on the dismissal calendar [3, 4, 9, 10]. Final Outcome On May 1, 2018, the day before the trial was scheduled to begin, the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement, leading the court to vacate the bench trial [21, 22]. Simultaneously, the parties filed a Stipulation to Entry of Judgment and Covenant Not To Execute [2, 23]. On May 2, 2018, the court entered a formal written judgment against Thomas C. Tracy, successfully settling and concluding the litigation [2, 23]. Case Details: Case ID: enclave-villas-condominium-council-of-co-owners-inc-v-thomas-c-tracy Docket: CV2017-002958 For more AZ HOA transparency resources visit https://azhoawatch.org Legal & Accuracy Notice - azhoawatch.org is operated by Hound LLC, a homeowner-run project, not a law firm. Nothing in this video is legal advice or creates an attorney-client relationship. We analyze public court, ADRE, OAH, and related public records and may express opinions. Not affiliated with any court, ADRE, or the OAH. Read the full Legal & Terms: https://azhoawatch.org/legal