Pfp dorsey/dorsey Place v. cao/xia
This text of Pfp dorsey/dorsey Place v. cao/xia (Pfp dorsey/dorsey Place v. cao/xia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA
PFP DORSEY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a ) Arizona Supreme Court Delaware limited liability ) No. CV-25-0071-PR company; DORSEY PLACE ) CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, an ) Court of Appeals Arizona nonprofit corporation, ) Division One ) No. 1 CA-SA 25-0015 Petitioners, ) ) Maricopa County v. ) Superior Court ) No. CV2019-055353 JIE CAO and HAINING “FRAZER” XIA, ) a married couple, ) ) FILED 08/20/2025 Respondents. ) ) __________________________________)
O R D E R
This matter is before the Court on a Petition for Review
seeking clarification of this Court’s Mandate issued in Cao et
al. v. PFP Dorsey Investments, LLC et al., 257 Ariz. 82 (2024).
This Court issued its Mandate on May 16, 2024, stating in
relevant part, “This Court, having considered the case, filed
its opinion on March 22, 2024, vacating the court of appeals’
decision, affirming the trial court except as to the issues
encompassed in Part II of this Opinion, and remanding to that
court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.”
Upon remand, Petitioners PFP Dorsey Investments, LLC and
Dorsey Place Condominium Association (collectively “Dorsey”)
took the position that this Court had affirmed the superior
court’s dismissal of Respondents Jie Cao and Haining “Frazer” Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-25-0071-PR Page 2 of 5
Xia’s (“the Xias”) claims, and that the only remaining issue to
be determined was the fair market value of the condominium unit
previously owned by the Xias. The Xias took the position that
all their previously dismissed claims had been reinstated on
remand.
Dorsey filed a motion to compel arbitration of the
valuation issue, pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1228 and the
Condominium Termination Agreement. In a minute entry dated
August 8, 2024, the superior court denied Dorsey’s motion to
compel arbitration. The Xias then filed a motion for leave to
file a Third Amended Complaint, realleging all their previously
dismissed claims and adding an additional party. In a minute
entry dated December 3, 2024, the superior court granted the
Xias’ motion.
Dorsey filed a Petition for Special Action in the court of
appeals, arguing that the superior court’s rulings were not
consistent with the Mandate, and seeking clarification
regarding how the Mandate should be interpreted and applied. On
February 25, 2025, the court of appeals entered an order
declining jurisdiction.
On March 19, 2025, Dorsey filed a “Petition for Review of
a Special Action Decision of the Court of Appeals,” seeking Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-25-0071-PR Page 3 of 5
clarification of this Court’s Mandate. On May 1, 2024, the Xias
filed “Respondents/Plaintiffs Jie Cao and Haining ‘Frazer’
Xia’s Response to Petition for Review.”
Upon consideration by the entire Court,
IT IS ORDERED that Dorsey’s “Petition for Review of a
Special Action Decision of the Court of Appeals” is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED clarifying that pursuant to this
Court’s Mandate issued in Cao on May 16, 2024, the trial court
is affirmed and the sole remaining issue to be determined is
the fair market value of the Xias’ condominium unit, to be paid
to the Xias as their total compensation in this matter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the superior court’s Minute
Entry re: Under Advisement Ruling dated August 8, 2024 and
Minute Entry dated December 3, 2024 are vacated.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is remanded to the
superior court for the parties to engage in final and binding
arbitration, as set forth in A.R.S. § 33-1228 and the
Condominium Termination Agreement, to determine the fair market
value of the Xias’ unit. Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-25-0071-PR Page 4 of 5
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED awarding Dorsey reasonable attorney
fees incurred.
DATED this 20th day of August, 2025.
/s/ ANN A. SCOTT TIMMER Chief Justice Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-25-0071-PR Page 5 of 5
TO:
Louis D Lopez Charles E Markle Andrew B Haynes Eric M Fraser Matthew J Martin Hon. M Scott McCoy Hon. Joseph W Malka Hon. Pamela S Gates Raymond L Billotte Hon. Danielle J Viola West Publishing Company Lexis Nexis
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Pfp dorsey/dorsey Place v. cao/xia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pfp-dorseydorsey-place-v-caoxia-ariz-2025.