In Southwest Soil Remediation, Inc. v. City of Tucson, 201 Ariz. 438, 442, P16, 36 P.3d 1208, 1212 (App. 2001) the Court concluded that the exhaustion of remedies doctrine precluded a soil recycling company from filing suit to overturn the decision of a city zoning administrator because it had not first appealed to the city's board of adjustment as required by statute; see A.R.S. 9-462.06 (1996). On the other hand, in Bentivegna v. Powers Steel & Wire Products, Inc., the Court held that the exhaustion of remedies doctrine did not preclude a lawsuit against a construction company for alleged defects. 206 Ariz. 581, 585, P13-14, 81 P.3d 1040, 1044 (App. 2003). The Court held that the trial court could address the merits of the action even though the owners did not appeal a corrective order issued by the Arizona State Registrar of Contractors because that administrative procedure was merely permissive and therefore did not trigger the exhaustion of remedies doctrine. Id.