Legally Speaking: Mountainside not throwing in towel on Ducey lawsuit

Aug 13, 2020, 11:06 AM | Updated: 3:26 pm

(AP Photo)...

(AP Photo)

(AP Photo)

In the epic legal battle of Ducey v. Mountainside, all thought Gov. Doug Ducey had won when he played his ace and threw down a set of almost unattainable guidelines for gyms and other businesses to reopen.

But Mountainside is not done yet. Just Tuesday night it posted a message to its members that it had filed, or would be filing, a motion for contempt against Ducey.

“However, we have filed a ‘Motion of Contempt’ against the Governor and his actions which has included four (4) different versions of protocols since July 15th, including two (2) separate, increasingly more restrictive protocols after the August 4th and August 7th rulings against the Governor. We will continue our communication as we try to function in this ‘paused’ environment, and work tirelessly to re-open!!”

Mountainside will likely be making the argument that again, Ducey has no rational basis for creating the uber strict fourth set of protocols and did so in retaliation to Mountainside’s lawsuit and Judge Timothy Thomason’s rulings against Ducey.

Not a bad argument at all. At first glance it does appear Ducey did just that. However, if he has the experts to back him up, Mountainside is likely fighting a losing battle.

How did we get to this point? Good question.

Below, I will explain the legal side, along with a timeline, and will leave it to you to decide for yourself what each side’s true motivation is and whether gyms should be allowed to reopen.

June 29, 2020: Gov. Ducey issued Executive Order 2020-43 (EO 2020-43). Pursuant to this order, gyms and fitness clubs (such as Mountainside) were required to close by 8 p.m. that day and remain closed until July 27, 2020.

There was no advance notice. In EO 2020-43, the governor said gyms may be allowed to reopen if they “submit a form as prescribed by the (ADHS) that attests the entity is in compliance with guidance issued by ADHS.”

As of June 29, there was no such form. In fact, the form doesn’t show up until much, much later.

June 30: Due to the forced closure with little to zero notice, Mountainside filed a lawsuit against Ducey and asked the court to stop EO 2020-43 from taking affect against it. (Mountainside filed for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction).

The EO was disappointing, frustrating and infuriating to many gyms across the Valley, most notably Mountainside Fitness.

As such, Mountainside decided to stay open in violation of Ducey’s order. Ducey obviously saw this as a direct affront to the law, his power and authority.

July 2: Mountainside’s blatant refusal to comply with Ducey’s order resulted in the Arizona Department of Health Services to give the gym one last chance.

It sent a “demand for compliance” letter and requested compliance with EO 2020-43 by July 3 or it threatened to sue Mountainside to force it to close.

July 6, 2020: All sides went to court and tried to convince Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Thomason to see things their way.

The judge found EO 2020-43 was constitutional, but ruled there must be some reasonable procedure in place for Mountainside to prove it could reopen safely.

After all, failure to put a procedure in place will be a deprivation of procedural due process.

July 22: After almost 2.5 weeks of waiting for the procedure to be put into place, Mountainside filed a “renewed” application for an injunction.

July 23: After almost a month, a draft of the form mentioned in EO 2020-43 was finally posted to the health department website (the final form was not posted until July 31).

Ducey crushed the hopes of Mountainside and other fitness centers when he issued EO 2020-52 and extended the date of closure for another two weeks.

Aug. 3: Mountainside was not happy and filed a renewed request for an injunction and the judge held a hearing.

By the way, judges do not like it when a party simply refuses to comply with their orders. It is seen as incredibly disrespectful and illegal.

Aug. 4: The judge rules that due process does not go away in times of hardship and the form and process is flawed and inadequate. EO 2020-43 violates due process.

The judge gives Ducey one week to put the process in place so Mountainside can apply for reopening. This is the judge’s way of saying he is not happy with Ducey’s actions, or lack thereof.

Aug. 5: Ducey files his Appeal to the Court of Appeals challenging Thomason’s decision ordering Ducey to put the process in place.

Ducey also asks the judge to hit the “pause” button on his order because in Ducey’s mind the judge made the wrong decision.

Aug. 7: Thomason shuts down Ducey’s “pause” request, explaining there is no reason to stay his previous order.

He previously upheld the constitutionality of Ducey’s executive order and ruled it was in “full force and effect and there is nothing preventing the Executive Brand from enforcing those orders and preventing the spread of the coronavirus. The only thing that this Court’s Order did was require a modicum of due process…” to Mountainside.

The judge explained the gyms have been shut down for well over a month without any opportunity to be heard.

If the judge allowed Ducey to drag his feet any longer on implementing the process to apply to reopen, then it would be even longer before the gyms get a chance to prove they can safely reopen. That would be unfair.

Aug. 10: After having a weekend to to stew on the judge shutting down Ducey, the governor comes back and throws down new guidelines for Mountainside and all gyms.

These guidelines, which are seemingly unattainable in the new future, sealed the deal.

Mountainside and gyms are not opening anytime soon. You can read the guidelines here.

As I said, Mountainside isn’t giving up. #Legallyspeaking it has had, and will continue to have, a very tough road ahead of it.

Mountainside is taking one for the team in that it is paying all the costs to try to get gyms and fitness centers open in our state.

That being said, I know a lot of Arizonans are on its side and, like Mountainside, are dying for gyms to be open again.

With experts on Ducey’s side, I don’t think Mountainside will win the war, even though it has won a couple battles.

The only thing certain in the uncertain world of COVID-19 is the uncertainty of the outcome of a legal lawsuit.

Monica Lindstrom

(AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: Arizona remains in state of confusion regarding abortions

Eventually, Arizona will have clarity on abortion law. For now, KTAR legal expert Monica Lindstrom says it is in a state of confusion.

2 years ago

(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: Abortion no longer a constitutional right, states to make decision

Roe and Casey are overturned. There is no longer a constitutional right to abortion. However, the question of whether an abortion is legal has reverted back to the states for each of them to decide on their own.

2 years ago

(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: It will come down to the states, not Supreme Court, to rule on abortion legality

The issue of whether an abortion will be legal and any rules regarding it will revert back to the states, not the Supreme Court, for each of them to decide on their own, writes Monica Lindstrom.

2 years ago

Arizona State Courts Building (Arizona Governor's Office Photo)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: Brnovich appeal to Arizona Supreme Court makes sense

KTAR legal analyst Monica Lindstrom thinks it's a good move by Attorney General Mark Brnovich to petition the Arizona Supreme Court to hear his appeal in a case about laws that were ruled unconstitutional.

3 years ago

(File Photo by Matthew Hatcher/Getty Images)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: Why judge rejected Arizona ban on mask mandates

KTAR legal expert Monica Lindstrom explains the reasons behind a judge's decision to strike down Arizona's ban on face mask mandates.

3 years ago

(Facebook File Photo/Phoenix Police Department)...

Monica Lindstrom

Legally Speaking: Police may need to be part of Phoenix oversight office

Phoenix's requirement that no current or former law enforcement be part of a new police oversight office appears to be in direct conflict with recently signed Arizona laws, writes KTAR News legal expert Monica Lindstrom.

3 years ago

Sponsored Articles


Day & Night Air Conditioning, Heating and Plumbing

Beat the heat, ensure your AC unit is summer-ready

With temperatures starting to rise across the Valley, now is a great time to be sure your AC unit is ready to withstand the sweltering summer heat.



Here are 5 things Arizona residents need to know about their HVAC system

It's warming back up in the Valley, which means it's time to think about your air conditioning system's preparedness for summer.


DISC Desert Institute for Spine Care

Sciatica pain is treatable but surgery may be required

Sciatica pain is one of the most common ailments a person can face, and if not taken seriously, it could become one of the most harmful.

Legally Speaking: Mountainside not throwing in towel on Ducey lawsuit