How Justice for Clayton Turned a Contractor With Judgments and a Revoked License Into an “Owens Victim”
- Justice for Laura volunteer
- 1 day ago
- 7 min read
This document summarizes publicly available court records, judgments, motions, regulatory materials from the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (ROC), and consumer reviews concerning Shawn Roanhorse and entities operating under the “Lone Cactus” name, including Lone Cactus Fence & Welding and Lone Cactus Construction, LLC. Certain non-party names are omitted for privacy. All referenced materials are available through Arizona eAccess, ROC public databases, and consumer review platforms.
Justice for Clayton and its affiliated Instagram account, Victims of Laura Owens, have repeatedly presented contractor Shawn Roanhorse as proof that Laura Owens leaves a trail of “victims” behind her. In that telling, Roanhorse—operating through businesses under the “Lone Cactus” name, including Lone Cactus Fence & Welding and Lone Cactus Construction, LLC—is described as a small contractor whose business was destroyed after Owens and her mother, Elizabeth Naylor, filed a civil lawsuit against him in 2021.
That portrayal depends on omission.
At the time Roanhorse was being promoted online as “Owens’ victim,” he had lost his Arizona contractor’s license. The loss of that license was not connected to Owens or Naylor. It followed regulatory action arising from other complaints, other customers, and other violations, after a series of disputes that escalated in severity, dollar amount, and judicial findings.
When those matters are examined together—court filings, judgments, regulatory records, and independent consumer complaints—the Owens/Naylor case does not mark the beginning of Roanhorse’s professional collapse. It is the least severe of several disputes that later produced trial findings, a granted summary judgment alleging fraud, multiple enforced judgments, and continued post-judgment noncompliance.
Any narrative that frames Roanhorse as a competent contractor undone by Owens—while omitting this broader record—cannot be reconciled with publicly available facts.
The Owens/Naylor Case: Acknowledged Deficiency, Enforced Judgment
According to public court filings, Owens and Naylor hired Roanhorse through his company to perform work on their Arizona property in 2021. The work was not completed as agreed. Substantial sums were paid for labor and materials that were defective, improperly installed, or never delivered.
As deficiencies accumulated, Roanhorse acknowledged that money was owed back. He executed a promissory note, agreeing to repay funds as a result of the deficient work. When repayment did not occur, Owens and Naylor filed a civil complaint in August 2021.
A judgment was entered against Shawn Roanhorse in favor of Owens and Naylor in the amount of $29,201.50. Roanhorse did not voluntarily satisfy the judgment. His counsel withdrew. Owens and Naylor ultimately pursued wage garnishment to collect the amount owed.
A Second Lawsuit: Trial, Findings, and Judicial Liability
In 2023, Roanhorse and Lone Cactus Construction, LLC were sued again—this time by an unrelated customer in Pinal County Superior Court. The plaintiff’s name is omitted here to protect privacy; the pleadings and judgment are publicly accessible through Arizona eAccess.
The allegations closely resemble the Owens/Naylor dispute.
The plaintiff paid $27,650 for contracted work that was not performed. According to the record, Roanhorse offered repeated explanations for delays, assured the plaintiff that repayment would occur, and stated he would “bring a check first thing tomorrow morning.”
He did not.
The case proceeded to the court, which ruled unequivocally in the plaintiff’s favor. It entered judgment jointly and severally against Roanhorse and his company, awarding $27,650.00 in damages and $8,317.59 in attorneys’ fees.
The Large-Scale Case: Summary Judgment and Findings of Fraud
The most serious allegations involving Roanhorse appear in a later lawsuit filed in Maricopa County Superior Court concerning a large-scale fencing project.
In that matter, Lone Cactus Construction, LLC, with Roanhorse as the qualifying party, entered into a contract valued at approximately $478,590. The plaintiff paid an upfront deposit of $180,000.
According to a Motion for Summary Judgment filed on March 12, 2025, Roanhorse represented that fencing materials had been purchased, shipped, delivered, and were undergoing specialized treatment. Those representations were false.
It opened with this statement:
“This case is about a contractor that fraudulently took One Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($180,000.00) from a neighborhood in Payson, Arizona and received nothing in return.”
According to the filings, Roanhorse:
represented that fencing materials had been purchased and delivered when they had not,
falsely claimed materials were undergoing specialized treatment,
failed to obtain required permits,
ignored a signed settlement agreement requiring repayment of $130,000, and
retained the entire deposit.
The motion states that the misconduct involved:
“consciously pursuing a course of conduct that significantly injured the rights” of the plaintiff.
The court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
A judgment was entered against Roanhorse, but it has not been satisfied, and on January 8, 2026, Roanhorse failed to appear for a court-ordered judgment debtor’s examination. It has been rescheduled.
Regulatory Action and Loss of License
Separate from any civil litigation, the Arizona Registrar of Contractors’ public records document sustained regulatory action against Lone Cactus Construction, LLC, with Shawn Roanhorse listed as the qualifying party.
As of October 14, 2025, License ROC 332252 is suspended, with a sub-status of Recovery Fund Payout, meaning consumer harm was substantiated to the point that state recovery mechanisms were triggered. The ROC’s public notice states plainly that the contractor “is not able to contract with this license at this time.”
The complaint history reflects multiple closed matters unrelated to Owens or Naylor. In 2024 alone, four complaints were resolved or disciplined, including one classified as “Legal – Revoked.” Other cases were closed with findings of confirmed noncompliance by the contractor. No open cases remain, not because allegations were unfounded, but because enforcement actions were completed.
These records exist independently of private lawsuits, online commentary, or personal disputes. They reflect formal regulatory review, investigation, and discipline by the state agency charged with protecting consumers from unlicensed or noncompliant contractors.
Nothing in the ROC file attributes the suspension, recovery fund payout, or disciplinary action to Owens or Naylor. The license consequences stem from separate complaints, separate customers, and separate violations.
Independent Consumer Complaints: Parallel Accounts
Independent consumer reviews provide a contemporaneous record that closely tracks the conduct later addressed in court filings and regulatory actions. Lone Cactus Fence & Welding holds an approximately 1.7-star rating on Yelp, compiled across multiple years. None of the reviews were authored by Owens or Naylor.
What these reviews describe is not dissatisfaction with workmanship. They repeatedly allege deposits taken, work not performed, and false explanations used to delay repayment or completion.
A review posted October 10, 2025, after Roanhorse no longer held an active contractor’s license, states:
“Lone Cactus Fence and Welding no longer has an active ROC number, it was revoked after a 15 month process where Mr. Shawn Roanhorse took a deposit for a fence, never built the fence, and never returned the deposit. He has an extensive history of poor business practices and outright theft of money and lies.”
A March 25, 2024 review describes conduct nearly identical to what appears in later pleadings:
“Shawn presents as a very personable and knowledgeable professional. He’s as far from that as possible. He outright lies, doesn’t show up to appointments and left 93’ of fencing and a gate unfinished after being paid in full.”
That reviewer further reports paying $3,800 for drafting and engineering work that was never provided, being told the county was responsible for permit delays—when the county confirmed the permit “was never submitted.” The review concludes:
“We sued and won a judgment against him, but now need the sheriff to intervene in confiscating property.”
A February 9, 2024 review alleges misrepresentation submitted to a government authority:
“He charged me for a custom, engineered set of drawings but fraudulently submitted an old, unstamped drawing to the County which did not represent my buildings. My permit would have been invalid if I had not caught this.”
That reviewer reports filing a complaint with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors and threatening legal action to recover the deposit.
Earlier reviews reflect the same progression. A 2022 review states:
“He had no intention of doing it… DO NOT USE HIM — he is NOT RELIABLE and he is NOT TRUSTWORTHY.”
A January 2023 review recounts partial performance followed by renewed assurances and silence:
“He said he was going to finish and do the right thing… That was over a week ago. Ghosted again.”
Across these reviews, the pattern is consistent:
– upfront payments collected
– work left incomplete or never begun
– shifting explanations for delays
– permits attributed to third parties
– communication discontinued
– customers forced into complaints, lawsuits, and enforcement
These accounts align with court judgments, regulatory findings, and subsequent loss of licensure. And they exist independently of Owens and Naylor.
Claims Made by "Victims of Laura Owens"
Instagram posts published by Victims of Laura Owens make specific, verifiable factual assertions about Owens and Naylor that are contradicted by the public record.
The posts state that Owens and Naylor “abused the courts,” “conned” a contractor out of $28,691.50, and attempted to “extort” payment through false allegations. No court has made such findings. No order, ruling, or sanction supports those claims. The only judicial determination reflected in the records is that a judgment was entered against Roanhorse.
The posts further claim that Roanhorse suffered catastrophic financial harm due to negative reviews “likely left by Laura & Jan.” No evidence is offered. Public review platforms do not show reviews authored by either woman. The claim attributes reputational harm to named individuals without factual support, while ignoring extensive documentation of unrelated consumer complaints, regulatory action, and litigation.
Taken together, these posts do not merely omit context. They assert false narratives of extortion, fraud, and abuse of process as established truth. That is the defining characteristic of defamatory content: false statements, presented as fact, that accuse identifiable individuals of serious misconduct without evidentiary basis.
The Record Versus the Narrative
In the case of Roanhorse, Justice for Clayton and Victims of Laura Owens presented him as a contractor ruined by Owens and Naylor. That portrayal only works if the rest of his record is erased.
They did not disclose that Roanhorse lost his Arizona contractor’s license following unrelated complaints. They did not disclose that courts entered multiple judgments against him, including a six-figure case in which summary judgment was granted on allegations of fraud. They did not disclose his failure to comply with court orders, the accumulation of regulatory complaints, or years of independent consumer reviews describing the same conduct. None of that involved Owens or Naylor.
Roanhorse was not undone by Owens. He was undone by his own actions, documented repeatedly by courts, regulators, and customers. The decision by groups devoted solely to attacking Owens to omit those facts speaks for itself — and it calls into question the reliability of everything else they claim about her.