Judge Christian R. Gullon, Case Number: 24PSCP00106, Date: 2024-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 24PSCP00106, Date: 2024-04-25 Tentative Ruling

MAP REALTY GROUP, INC.’s PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION is CONTINUED due to concerns about proper service.

This is an arbitration petition arising from a real estate project. Petitioner or Plaintiff MAPS REALTY, INC. alleges the following against Respondent or Defendant Wallace Y. Fu Architect, a California Corporation: On July 26, 2019 and July 31, 2019, the parties entered into two ‘Owner-Architect Design Proposal Agreements’ (“Agreements”) wherein Defendant was to provide architectural services for the design and permit approval for the construction of certain apartment units to the preparation of civil engineering plans (such as grading, drainage, and street improvements), and conceptual drawings of the units, to preparing and applying for permits.[1] Defendant, however, failed to timely seek an extension to the conductional use permits and failed to submit renewed proposals by certain deadlines.

On April 14, 2024, Plaintiff filed a ‘PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION’ (“Continuance Request”).

There is no proof of service attached to the petition or filed in the docket. According to the Continuance Request, Plaintiff argues that Defendant is evading service. Indeed, there have been nine attempts at service. (Continuance Request, Ex. 1.) But, while Plaintiff maintains that service has been attempted at the individual Defendant’s “personal residence and business address,” the 40 E Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91006 (Business) where service was attempted five times is a “bad address’ because there is new owner and a new business.

While Plaintiff states that Fu’s insurance company has communicated with Plaintiff (email sent on 4/3/24 seeking additional time), it is still unclear whether Fu has been properly served with notice of the motion.

Thus, absent a showing of service, it would be a violation of due process to rule on the motion.

[1] The court will not engage in the merits of the petition until proper service has been provided. Briefly, however, the petition indicates that copies of the agreements are attached as Exhibits 2 and 3. (Petition p. 8:23-24.) Those agreements, however, are not between Wallace Y. Fu Architect. Instead, they are between MAP Realty Group, Inc. and California Opportunity Zone Fund, LP and signed by Dr. Prasad Jeereddi and BaoBao Reeher. Accordingly, the first prong of CCP section 1281.2—that there be a written agreement to arbitrate the controversy—does not seem to be complied with.