Judge Katherine Chilton, Case 19STCP01039 2023-04-19 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: 19STCP01039, Date: 2023-04-19 Tentative Ruling

If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 25 at the Spring Street Courthouse up until the morning of the motion hearing. The e-mail address is SSCdept25@lacourt.org. The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.
Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time. **Please note we no longer use CourtCall**

Case Number: 19STCP01039 Hearing Date: April 19, 2023 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION FOR ORDER RESTORING CASE TO ACTIVE STATUS IN DEPARTMENT 25 AND TO SPECIALLY SET DATE TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD AND ENTER JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner Arden Silverman dba Capital Asset Protection

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO RESTORE CASE TO ACTIVE STATUS;

SCHEDULE HEARING

(CCP § 128)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner Arden Silverman’s Motion to Restore the Case to Active Status is MOOT.

A hearing on the Second Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award, filed by Petitioner Silverman is set for MAY 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of April 16, 2023. [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of April 16, 2023. [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On February 6, 2019, arbitrator Yvonne B. Burke issued an Arbitration Award in favor of non-party Strategic Business Services, LLC (“SBS”) against Respondent Mahaffey Law Group, P.C. (“Respondent” or “Mahaffey”) in the sum of $2,233.00, plus $400.00 in attorney’s fees and administrative fee of the arbitration. (Pet. ¶¶ 6-8, p. 6.) On March 25, 2019, SBS assigned its rights to the Arbitration Award to Petitioner Arden Silverman dba Capital Asset Protection (“Silverman”). (Pet. p. 8.)

On April 2, 2019, Silverman, in propria persona, as assignee of SBS (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (“Petition”) as to Respondent Mahaffey.

Respondent filed a Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award on May 2, 2019.

On June 7, 2019, Petitioner filed a Substitution of Attorney, indicating that he had retained counsel. Through his Counsel, Petitioner filed an Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award on the same day. On June 27, 2019, Petitioner filed an Opposition to Respondent’s Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award and a Request for Sanctions.

On September 25, 2019, Respondent filed an Opposition to Petitioner’s Amended Petition. Respondent also filed a Reply to Petitioner’s Opposition to Motion to Vacate, on October 1, 2019.

On October 8, 2019, the Court noted that SBS was a party to the arbitration proceedings but neither Petitioner nor Respondent named SBS as a party in its moving papers. (10-8-19 Minute Order.) For this reason, the Court continued the hearing on the Amended Petition and Motion to Vacate. (Ibid.) On December 5, 2019, the Court noted that no additional papers had been filed and placed the Amended Petition and Motion to Vacate off calendar. (12-5-19 Minute Order.)

On December 13, 2019, Petitioner filed a Second Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award. Respondent filed an Opposition and Request to Vacate Award on December 16, 2019. On June 17, 2020, Petitioner filed an Opposition to Respondent’s Request to Vacate Award. No hearings were scheduled on the Petition.

On November 9, 2020, Petitioner filed a Request for Order to Restore Case to Active Status.

On December 9, 2022, Petitioner filed a Notice of Related Case. On January 30, 2023, the Court found that “19STCP01039 and 22STCP01747, are related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a)” and designated 19STCP01039 as the lead case. (1-30-23 Minute Order.) Both cases were assigned to Judge Katherine Chilton in Department 25 at Spring Street Courthouse. (Ibid.)

On January 30, 2023, Petitioner filed the instant Motion Seeking an Order Restoring This Case to Active Status in Department 25 and to Specially Set Date to Confirm Arbitration Award and Enter Judgment (“Motion”).

II. Legal Standard & Discussion

Petitioner moves for the following orders:

1. An order restoring this matter to civil active status;

2. An order setting a hearing on Second Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award.

(Mot. pp. 1-2.)

Petitioner sets forth the procedural history of the case and explains that the Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award was placed off calendar on December 5, 2019, as “an additional party needed to be included for the court to have jurisdiction.” (Kalajian Decl. ¶¶ 2-4.) Subsequently, Petitioner filed a Second Amended Petition; however, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, no hearing was scheduled. (Ibid. at ¶¶ 6-8.) The case was transferred from Department 94 to 25. (Ibid. at ¶ 10.) Petitioner’s counsel inquired regarding the status of the case and was informed that the case was closed, so nothing further could be calendared. (Ibid.)

Petitioner filed a new Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award in Department 26, Case No. 22STCP01747; however, Judge Windham in Department found that Case No. 19STCP01039 was still active, so Petitioner filed a Notice of Related Case in Department 25. (Ibid. at ¶¶ 11-13.) Through the instant Motion, Petitioner “seeks a determination by Department 25” whether the instant action is still active. (Mot. p. 4.)

Petitioner cites to Code of Civil Procedure § 128(a)(8), for the Court’s power “[t]o amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice.” (Ibid.)

The Court finds that on December 5, 2019, the Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award filed by Petitioner and the Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award, filed by Respondent, were placed off calendar. (12-5-19 Minute Order.) The action has remained active and does not need to be restored to active status, thus, Petitioner’s Motion to Restore the Case to Active Status is MOOT.

Furthermore, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 128(a)(8), the Court has the power to schedule a hearing on the Second Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award, filed by Petitioner Silverman. The hearing on the Second Amended Petition is scheduled for MAY 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.

III. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner Arden Silverman’s Motion to Restore the Case to Active Status is MOOT.

A hearing on the Second Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award, filed by Petitioner Silverman is scheduled for MAY 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.