Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 21SMCV00829, Date: 2025-02-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21SMCV00829    Hearing Date: February 25, 2025    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Goodman v. NYLA Productions LLC, et al.

CASE NO.:                21SMCV00829

MOTION:                  Motions to Vacate Stay and Enter Default

HEARING DATE:   2/25/2025

Legal Standard

Stay of Proceedings

Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.4 provides, in relevant part:

If a court of competent jurisdiction, whether in this State or not, has ordered arbitration of a controversy which is an issue involved in an action or proceeding pending before a court of this State, the court in which such action or proceeding is pending shall, upon motion of a party to such action or proceeding, stay the action or proceeding until an arbitration is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as the court specifies.

(Emphasis Added.)

Default

Code of Civil Procedure section 585 provides the Court’s authority to enter default against defendants. Courts have an inherent power to enforce compliance with their orders and rulings through contempt proceedings. (In re M.R. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 49, 56.) Courts also have statutory authority to enforce compliance with their orders. (CCP § 128(a)(4).) CCP section 1209(a)(5) expressly provides the Court with the power to punish “[d]isobedience of any lawful judgment, order, or process of the court.”  

Contempt is any act, in or out of court, “which tends to impede, embarrass or obstruct the court in the discharge of its duties.” (In re Shortridge (1893) 99 Cal. 526, 532.) Contempt committed in the immediate view and presence of the Court may be punished summarily, but contempt committed outside the Court’s presence requires an affidavit presenting the facts constituting the contempt. (CCP § 1211(a).) “When the contempt is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court, or of the judge at chambers, an affidavit shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt, or a statement of the facts by the referees or arbitrators, or other judicial officers.” Thereafter, an order to show cause must be issued and a hearing on the facts must be held by the court. (Arthur v. Superior Court (1965) 62 Cal.2d 404, 407-408.)  

To justify the application, the requirements “can be easily satisfied with a declaration under penalty of perjury[.]” (M.R., supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at 63.) The declaration need only make a prima facie showing of the following elements: “(1) the making of the order; (2) knowledge of the order; (3) ability of respondent to render compliance; and (4) willful disobedience of the order.” (People v. Superior Court (1965) 239 Cal.App.2d 99, 104; see also In re Morelli (1970) 11 Cal.App.3d 819, 832-33.) Although not required, the alleged contemnor may respond to the affidavit and OSC by counteraffidavits or declarations.  The counter-affidavits serve as the “answer” to the charging allegations in the original affidavit. (Lyon v. Superior Court, supra, 68 Cal.2d at 452.) The alleged contemnor may still assert his or her defenses entirely at the hearing. (CCP § 1217.)

Civil contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature because of the penalties which may be imposed. (In re Kreitman (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 750, 754.) The punishment for contempt is up to five days' imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $1,000 for each contempt. (See CCP § 1218(a).) Thus, “guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Ross v. Sup. Ct. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 899, 913.)  

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff Geoffrey Goodman moves to vacate the arbitration stay and for entry of default against Defendants NYLA Productions LLC and Louis Arriola.  Here, the Court lacks jurisdiction to lift the stay. Apparently, the arbitration was not held in accordance with the agreement to arbitrate. Plaintiff merely contends that Defendants have caused a delay in arbitration proceedings by failing to pay their portion of the JAMS fees, failing to respond to an email correspondence or confirm a preliminary conference call, and causing the conference call to be placed off calendar. (Robin Decl., ¶¶ 5-8.) If Defendants are causing an improper delay in the proceedings, then Plaintiff must first exhaust its remedies provided for by the arbitration. (See JAMS Rule 19(b), 22(j).)

Even if the court were inclined to vacate the stay, entry of default would be inappropriate. Plaintiff argues that Defendants entered a “default status” by failing to make the initial payments to JAMS. However, Plaintiff does not show any grounds for default at the arbitration or with respect to this matter.  Code of Civil Procedure section 585 requires that defendants have “no answer, demurrer, notice of motion to strike of the character specified in subdivision (f)…” or other listed documents on record. Defendants have a responsive pleading to the operative complaint. They filed a motion to compel arbitration, which may be filed in lieu of filing an answer to a complaint. (CCP §1281.7.) Defendants are therefore not in default status. Otherwise, the Court lacks the jurisdiction to strike Defendants’ answer within the arbitration itself.

Accordingly, the motions are DENIED.