Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 22STCP03308, Date: 2023-11-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCP03308 Hearing Date: March 5, 2024 Dept: 25
Hearing Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2024
Case Name: EXECUTIVE PRESENTATIONS, INC. v. JOSHUA WEISBORD
Case No.: 22STCP03308
Motion: Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award
Moving Party: Petitioner Executive Presentations, Inc.
Responding Party: Unopposed
Notice: OK
Tentative Ruling: The Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is GRANTED.
Counsel for Petitioner is directed to serve and electronically submit a proposed form of judgment within 10-days.
BACKGROUND
On September 6, 2022, Petitioner Executive Presentations, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a motion to compel arbitration and for the Court to appoint an arbitrator against Respondent Joshua Weisbord (“Respondent”).
On March 29, 2023, the Court continued the hearing on the motion to May 1, 2023, so that Petitioner could provide the Court with authenticated copies of the agreement containing the arbitration provision along with other exhibits requested by the Court.
On May 1, 2023, the Court granted Petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration and ordered the arbitration to be conducted by the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) with an arbitrator selected by the AAA in accordance with its rules and deferred Petitioner’s request for costs until the conclusion of the arbitration.
On September 12, 2023, Arbitrator William J. Tucker, Esq. (the “Arbitrator”) issued an initial arbitration award in the amount of $40,111.02 to be paid by Respondent.
On October 4, 2023, the Arbitrator issued a subsequent final arbitration award (the “Award”) amending the initial arbitration award to correct for an error which misstated the interest on the initial award.
On October 5, 2023, Petitioner filed a Petition for an Order Confirming Arbitration Award (the “Initial Petition”) and provided Respondent with notice of the Initial Petition and proof of service by mail.
On November 30, 2023, without hearing and adopting the tentative ruling as the final order of the Court, the Court denied the Initial Petition due to the Initial Petition being filed less than 10 days after the Award was served. (11/30/23 Minute Order, p. 6.) The Court also denied the Initial Petition because it did not comply with CCP § 1283.6 as the Arbitrator did not “file the award along with Form LAADR-014 and proof of service indicating that both parties were served.” (11/30/23 Minute Order, p. 6.)
On January 2, 2024, Petitioner filed and served the instant Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award (the “Petition”). According to the proof of service attached to the Petition, Respondent was served with the Petition on January 2, 2024, by email and mail.
MOVING PARTY POSITION
Petitioner requests that the Court confirm the award totaling $40,111.02 representing the sum of $16,980.13 for failure to pay for services, $3,121.55 in interest, $15,964.50 in attorney’s fees, $2,394.84 in costs, and $1,650.00 in fees remitted to the American Arbitration Association by Petitioner.
No opposition has been filed.
REPLY
No reply has been filed.
ANALYSIS
I. Confirming a Contractual Arbitration Award
A. Legal Standard
“Any party to an arbitration award in which an award has been made may petition the court to confirm, correct, or vacate the award.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1285.) “A petition under this chapter shall: (a) Set forth the substance of or have attached a copy of the agreement to arbitrate unless the petitioner denies the existence of the agreement. (b) Set forth the names of the arbitrators. (c) Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1285.) “If a petition . . . is duly served and filed, the court shall confirm the award as made, whether rendered in this state or another state.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1286.) 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1288.)
“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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1287.4.)
Code Civ. Proc § 1283.6 provides that “[t]he neutral arbitrator shall serve a signed copy of the award on each party to the arbitration personally or by registered or certified mail or as provided in the agreement.” Also, a party may seek a court judgment confirming an arbitration award by filing and serving a petition no more than four years, but not less than 10 days, after the award is served. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1288, 1288.4.)
Code of Civil Procedure § 1290.4, the statute governing proper service of the Petition states, in pertinent part:
“(a) A copy of the petition and written notice of the time and place of the hearing thereof and any other papers upon which the petition is based shall be served in the manner provided in the arbitration agreement for the service of such petition and notice.
(b) If the arbitration agreement does not provide the manner in which such service shall be made and the person upon whom service is to be made has not previously appeared in the proceeding and has not previously been served in accordance with this subdivision: ¶ (1) Service within this State shall be made in the manner provided by law for the service of summons in an action; ¶ (2) Service outside this State shall be made by mailing a copy of the petition and notice of hearing and other papers by registered or certified mail. Personal service is the equivalent of such service by mail. Proof of service by mail shall be made by affidavit showing such mailing together with the return receipt of the United States Post Office bearing the signature of the person on whom service was made.”
B. Discussion
Petitioner has satisfied the requirements of CCP § 1285.4. Petitioner has set forth the substance of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate. (Petition, p. 2.) Petitioner has stated the Arbitrator’s name, William J. Tucker, Esq., and attaches two copies of the Arbitrator’s award of $40,111.02 in Plaintiff’s favor. (Petition, Attachment 8(c)-2, see also Attachment 8(c).) The Award stipulates that Petitioner is to be awarded the amount totaling $40,111.02 representing the sum of $16,980.13 for failure to pay for services, $3,121.55 in interest and $15,964.50 for attorney’s fees, $2,394.84 in costs, and $1,650.00 in fees remitted to the American Arbitration Association by Petitioner. (Id.) Petitioner has therefore complied with Code of Civil Procedure section 1285.4.
Petitioner has also complied with CCP § 1290.4. The Petition and notice of hearing was served by email and mail on Respondent on January 2, 2024. (See 01/02/24 Notice of Hearing.) Thus, Petitioner has met the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1290.4.
The Court will now address whether Petitioner has complied with CCP § 1283.6. California Rules of Court, Rule 3.825(b)(1) provides that “[w]ithin 10 days after the conclusion of the arbitration hearing, the arbitrator must file the award with the clerk, with proof of service on each party to the arbitration.” (CA ST CIVIL RULES Rule 3.825(b)(1).) Code Civ. Proc § 1283.6 provides that “[t]he neutral arbitrator shall serve a signed copy of the award on each party to the arbitration personally or by registered or certified mail or as provided in the agreement.”
Counsel for Petitioner, Steven J. Revitz (“Revitz”), declares that the Award was served on Respondent by Jessica Allen of the AAA on October 4, 2023. (Revitz Decl., ¶ 7; Petition at Attachment 8(c)-(3).) Revitz attests to serving a copy of the Award on Respondent by first-class mail on October 5, 2023. (Revitz Decl., ¶¶ 8-9; Petition at Attachment 8(c)-(4).) Revitz states that the only reason the Initial Petition was denied was because proof of service of the Award signed by the Arbitrator was not filed with the Court. (Revitz Decl., ¶ 14.) Revitz states that after receiving the Court’s ruling, he contacted Jessica Allen who is the case administrator in connection with the arbitration in which the Award was issued. (Revitz Decl., ¶ 15.) Revitz requested that the Arbitrator sign a proof of service of the Award, but he was told that the AAA does not serve documents and information is sent via e-mail, where an e-mail address is provided, and via regular and certified mail. (Revitz Decl., ¶¶ 16-17; Attachment 8(c)-(7) and 8(c)-(8).) Revitz’s attempts to obtain a signed proof of service from the Arbitrator were unsuccessful and he was told by Jessica Allen that “the most the AAA would do would be to provide [him] with a certified copy of the [Award].” (Revitz Decl., ¶ 19.) Revitz states that Petitioner cannot comply with the request in the Court’s ruling that the Arbitrator file the Award along with Form LADDR-104 and a proof of service indicating that both Petitioner and Respondent were served. (Revitz Decl., ¶ 20.) Revitz states that he served the Award on Respondent on October 5, 2023. (Revitz Decl., ¶ 20.)
Initially, the Court finds that the Petition is timely under Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1288 and 1288.4, as the Petition has now been filed not less than 10 days after the arbitration award was served. In addition, based on Revitz’s declaration and the email response of AAA case administrator, Jessica Allen, the Court finds that the award was properly served “as provided in the agreement,” as Allen represents that AAA rules provide that the award is delivered via email where an email address is provided, and via regular and certified mail. Petitioner has attached a letter from Jessica Allen dated October 4, 2023—addressed to all parties of the inclusion of the Award via email to Revitz and via email and regular and certified mail to Respondent. (Petition, Attachment 8(c)- 3.) Therefore, the Court finds this support sufficient to meet the requirement under CCP section 1283.6 and CRC rule 3.825(b)(1).
Accordingly, the Petition is GRANTED.
II. Conclusion
Petitioner Executive Presentation, Inc.’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is GRANTED.
Counsel for Petitioner is ordered to serve and submit a proposed form of Judgment within 10-days.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.