Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 23STCP03600, Date: 2024-02-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCP03600    Hearing Date: February 22, 2024    Dept: 25

Hearing Date:                         Thursday, February 22, 2024

Case Name:                             MICHAEL JOHN HULLEY; and RICHARD MICHAEL SANDERS v. MARTIN L. VUKICH, TTEE of the VUKICH FAMILY TRUST U/A DATED 07/17/2003

Case No.:                                23STCP03600

Motion:                                   Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award

Moving Party:                         Petitioners Michael John Hulley and Richard Michael Sanders

Responding Party:                   Unopposed  

Notice:                                    OK

Tentative Ruling:                    The Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

On October 2, 2023, Petitioners Michael John Hulley and Richard Michael Sanders (“Petitioners”) filed a Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (the “Petition”) to confirm the award issued by a FINRA Arbitration Panel (“Arbitrator”) granting Petitioners’ request for expungement against Respondent Martin L. Vukich, TTEE of the Vukich Family Trust U/A (“Respondent”).   

On February 5, 2024, after hearing, the Court continued the hearing on the Petition due to numerous deficiencies pertaining to the Petition. The Court found that the Petition did not comply with CCP § 1285.4 as it did not set forth the names of the Arbitration Panel members and did not set forth the substance of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate in the Petition. (02/05/24 Minute Order at p. 4.) Moreover, the Court found that the Petition and notice of hearing did not include a proof of service indicating that Respondent was served with a copy of the Petition and summons under CCP § 1290.4. (02/05/24 Minute Order at p. 5.)  Additionally, the Court found that the Petition did not satisfy the requirements of CCP § 1283.6 because there was no indication that a signed copy of the award was served on both parties by registered or certified mail, or by a prescribed method in the parties’ arbitration agreement. (02/05/24 Minute Order at p. 5.) Petitioners were ordered to file supplemental papers addressing the Court’s identified deficiencies at least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing. (02/05/24 Minute Order at p. 6.) The Court’s minute order stated that the hearing was continued to March 6, 2024 (02/05/24 Minute Order at p. 6); however, the register of actions indicates that the hearing was continued to February 22, 2024.

On February 6, 2024, Petitioners filed the instant Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (the “Amended Petition”).

On February 14, 2024, Petitioners filed a Proof of Service indicating that Respondent was served with the Amended Petition via mail on February 6, 2024. An Acknowledgement of Receipt is attached to the Proof of Service and is signed by Respondent’s counsel.

MOVING PARTY POSITION

            Petitioners request that the Court enter an order confirming the arbitration award issued in the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) arbitration proceedings styled Martin L. Vukich, TTEE of the Vukich Family Trust U/A Dated 07/17/2003, Case No. 22-00379, which included the Arbitrator’s recommendation for expungement of all references to this matter from their Central Registration Depository (“CRD”) registration records.

OPPOSITION

            No opposition has been filed.

REPLY

            No reply has been filed.

ANALYSIS

I.          Confirming an 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 Amended 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  

Petitioners have satisfied the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1285.4. Petitioners have provided a copy of the arbitration award. (Amended Declaration of Jacqueline C. Karama, ¶ 10; Exh. F.) The Amended Petition also sets forth the names of the Arbitration Panel Members. (Amended Petition, ¶¶ 10, 12.) The Amended Petition also articulates the substance of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate. (Amended Petition, ¶¶ 5-9.) Petitioners have also attached a copy of the parties’ signed Uniform Submission Agreements, in which the parties consented to arbitration before FINRA. (Amended Declaration of Jacqueline C. Karama, ¶¶ 4-5; Exhs. B-D.)

Petitioners have met the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1290.4. The Court notes that Petitioners have provided a proof of service indicating that Respondent’s counsel was served with a copy of the Summons and Petition by email and mail. (Amended Declaration of Jacqueline C. Karama, ¶¶ 14; Exh. K.) Petitioners have also presented evidence that Respondent does not oppose the Petition. (Id., ¶ 2; Exh. A.) On February 14, 2024, Petitioners filed a Proof of Service indicating that Respondent was served—via counsel—with the Amended Petition by mail on February 6, 2024. Respondent’s counsel even signed an Acknowledgement of Receipt concerning the Amended Petition. Petitioners have therefore complied with CCP § 1290.4.

Additionally, the Court finds that Petitioners have met the requirements under CCP § 1283.6. 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.” The final arbitration award was served on the parties through FINRA’s service portal. (Amended Declaration of Jacqueline C. Karama, ¶ 10; Exh. E.) The Uniform Submission Agreements, in which the parties consented to arbitration, state that the FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure governs the arbitration. (Id., ¶¶ 4-5; Exhs. B-D.) The FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure requires that parties use the FINRA service portal to electronically file and serve documents, and mandates the use of the FINRA service portal. (See FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure <https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/rulebooks/finra-rules/12300> [as of February 22, 2024].)

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award.

II.        Conclusion

            The Amended Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award filed by Petitioners Michael John Hulley and Richard Michael Saunders is GRANTED. The Amended Petition is unopposed which creates an inference that the Amended Petition is meritorious. (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)

            Moving parties are ordered to give notice.