Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 21STCV32131, Date: 2024-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV32131    Hearing Date: November 8, 2024    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: November 8, 2024

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Vacate Arbitration and Reinstate Action

Moving Party: Plaintiffs Derrick R. Upchurch and Sari M. Upchurch

Responding Party: Defendant Nathalie Dougé

T/R:     PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IS DENIED.

PLAINTIFF TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

CCP 1281.98(a) provides, “In an employment or consumer arbitration that requires, either expressly or through application of state or federal law or the rules of the arbitration provider, that the drafting party pay certain fees and costs during the pendency of an arbitration proceeding, if the fees or costs required to continue the arbitration proceeding are not paid within 30 days after the due date, the drafting party is in material breach of the arbitration agreement, is in default of the arbitration, and waives its right to compel the employee or consumer to proceed with that arbitration as a result of the material breach.” Subsection (b)(1) allows the non-drafting party the option of withdrawing the dispute from arbitration and proceeding in Court in the event the drafting party violates subsection (a).

Plaintiffs move to vacate the parties’ arbitration proceeding on the ground that Defendant Douge failed to timely pay an arbitration invoice. Plaintiffs assert that Defendant failed to pay a September 3, 2024 invoice by the due date of October 4, 2024. In opposition, Defendant’s counsel represents that the invoice was not received on September 3, 2024 via email. Counsel represents that counsel’s IT person stated that there was a “system wide ‘parameter error’ on 09/03, one which impacted our ability to receive emails.” Counsel states that the invoice was not received until September 24, 2024 and that the check was mailed to AAA on October 3, 2024.

The Court is unpersuaded that Defendant has violated CCP § 1281.98(a). Defendant’s counsel represents that the invoice was not timely received and, even barring this issue, counsel sent payment to AAA before the October 4, 2024 deadline.

Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.