Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 22STCP03755, Date: 2023-12-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCP03755    Hearing Date: December 7, 2023    Dept: 14

Mesrizadeh v. Diab

Petition and Motion

Zal now petitions this court to correct the award by reducing it to $16,861.00. Zal also moves this court for an order staying enforcement of the award. In response, Diab requests that the award be confirmed.

Decision

            The request to correct the award is DENIED. The motion to stay enforcement is DENIED. The request to confirm the award is GRANTED. Respondent Diab is to submit a proposed judgment within 10 days.

Governing Standard

Code of Civil Procedure § 1285 provides that “[a]ny party to an arbitration in which an award has been made may petition the court to…correct or vacate the award.” Code of Civil Procedure § 1285.2 permits the responding party to request that the court confirm the award instead. There is no need for multiple hearings; the court may confirm, vacate, or correct the award via this single proceeding. Code of Civil Procedure § 1286.

The default position is that the court will confirm the award unless there is affirmative reason to vacate or correct it. Code of Civil Procedure § 1286.

There are three possible grounds to correct an award, set forth in Code of Civil Procedure § 1282.6:

“(a) There was an evident miscalculation of figures or an evident mistake in the description of any person, thing or property referred to in the award;

(b) The arbitrators exceeded their powers but the award may be corrected without affecting the merits of the decision upon the controversy submitted; or

(c) The award is imperfect in a matter of form, not affecting the merits of the controversy.”

Each of these grounds is a standalone, separate basis with its own qualifications that must be met. This is not a factorial or balancing test, and items which are insufficient to place the award in one category cannot be aggregated with other items to place the award into another category where they do not apply. See Heimlich v. Shivji (2019) 7 Cal.5^th 350, 368 (refusal to hear evidence is not a back door to other considerations). There is one door into each metaphorical “house,” and it is the front door.

Request to Correct

            The award submitted with the petition reflects the arbitrator’s decision that the costs to correct Zal’s mistakes were $32,861.00. It also contains an order that Zal pay that amount to Diab. Zal does not dispute those findings in this petition.

Instead, Zal argues that it already paid Diab $16,000, and that the arbitrator’s award should have been offset by that amount. There is no evidence that a formal request for offset was made to the arbitrator while the arbitration was pending. The only evidence is that this request was expressly made only after the arbitration had concluded, and that it was couched as a “correction” of the award, rather than as a submission of a new or different issue.

The failure of the arbitrator to award a $16,000 disputed offset[1] is not a basis for the court to correct an award. The arbitrator decided the question presented to him (how much did Zal owe Diab for each defect), and the parties concede that his decision was correct. The presence or absence of a $16,000 pre-payment, which would serve as an offset, was neither presented nor decided. The court cannot “correct” the arbitrator’s award by deciding a question not submitted to him. And even if the question had been submitted to him, the court cannot “correct” an arbitrator’s award simply by overruling him.

This begs the broader question: what can a party do if it advances part of an arbitration award before the arbitration is complete, but its opponent refuses to acknowledge the advance? The first answer is, rather obviously, make sure that the issue is clearly submitted to the arbitrator during the arbitration. But even if that doesn’t happen, the party still retains the ability to file post-judgment motions, including a motion to amend the judgment, to ensure that it gets credit for payments made. The court’s initial task is to enter a judgment that reflects the arbitrator’s award. This does not mean that the court must allow a creditor to simply keep the debtor’s payments without acknowledging them.

The request to correct the award is DENIED.

Request to Confirm

            Because there is no statutory reason to vacate or correct the award, the request to confirm it is GRANTED. Diab is to submit a proposed judgment within 10 days.

Motion to Stay Enforcement