Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 22STCP00384, Date: 2025-04-03 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

On March 5, 2025, Petitioner filed this petition to confirm arbitration award (the “Petition”) of $422,938.07 in her favor as against respondent 4575 Santa Monica Blvd., LLC (“Respondent”) awarded by the Honorable Lisa Hart Cole, Arbitrator and retired Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court on February 13, 2025. The Petition seeks confirmation of the award and judgment according to it. The Petition also seeks an additional $1,792.50 for attorney’s fees and expenses incurred in connection with the Petition.

“Any party to an arbitration in which an award has been made may petition the court to confirm, correct or vacate the award.” (Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”), § 1285.)

“A proceeding under th[e] [Arbitration title of the Code of Civil Procedure] in the courts of this State [i.e., pursuant to CCP §§ 1280-1294.4] is commenced by filing a petition. Any person named as a respondent in a petition may file a response thereto. The allegations of a petition are deemed to be admitted by a respondent duly served therewith unless a response is duly served and filed. The allegations of a response are deemed controverted or avoided.” (CCP, § 1290.)

The petition must: “(a) [s]et forth the substance of or have attached a copy of the agreement to arbitrate unless the petitioner denies the existence of such an agreement”; “(b) [s]et forth the names of the arbitrators” and “(c) [s]et forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.” (CCP, § 1285.4.) The petition must also “name as respondents all parties to the arbitration and may name as respondents any other persons bound by the arbitration award.” (CCP, § 1285.) A petition to confirm an award must be served and filed within four years after the date the petitioner was served with a signed copy of the award. (CCP, § 1288.)

If a petition or response requesting confirmation is duly filed and served, the court must confirm, correct and confirm, or vacates the award or dismiss the proceeding. (CCP, § 1286; see Horn v. Gurewitz (1968) 261 Cal.App.2d 255, 258; Pacific Law Group U.S.A. v. Gibson (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 577, 580; Cooper v. Lavely & Singer Professional Corp. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 1, 10.)

“The court may not vacate an award unless … [¶] [a] petition or response requesting that the award be vacated has been duly served or filed ….” (CCP, § 1286.4, subd. (a).) A response seeking to correct and confirm or vacate an arbitration award must be served and filed within ten days of service of a petition to confirm that same arbitration award, unless the timeframe is extended by agreement of the parties or “for good cause, by order of the court.” Thus, a court may not vacate an award pursuant to a petition for that relief that was not duly served or filed. (See Oaktree Capital Mgmt., L.P. v. Bernard (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 60, 64 [a response served out of the ten-day window has not been “duly served” as required for relief by Code Civ. Proc., § 1286.4].)

“If an [arbitration] award is confirmed, judgment shall be entered in conformity therewith. The judgment so entered has the same force and effect as and is subject to all the provisions of law relating to, a judgment in a civil action of the same jurisdictional classification; and it may be enforced like any other judgment of the court in which it is entered, in an action of the same jurisdictional classification.” (CCP, § 1287.4.)

Petitioner has satisfied the procedural requirements for a petition to confirm an arbitration award.

Petitioner provided a copy of the Settlement Agreement containing an Arbitration Clause. (Pet., Attachment 4(b).) The Petition names the arbitrator (Pet., ¶ 6 [“Lisa Hart Cole”]) and attaches a copy of the Final Arbitration Award. (Pet., Attachment 8(c); CCP, § 1285.4)

The Petition also names 4575 Santa Monica Blvd., LLC, a California limited liability company, as Respondent. (CCP, § 1285; Pet., ¶ 1.)

Last, the Petition was served and filed within four years after the date Respondent was served with a signed copy of the award. (CCP, § 1288; see Pet., ¶ 9 [stating that the signed award was served on Petitioner on February 13, 2025].)

The Petition is unopposed. Thus, the Petition to confirm the arbitration award is not controverted and the allegations in the Petition are accepted as true. (CCP, § 1290.)

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court