Judge: Mel Red Recana, Case: 24STCP00039, Date: 2024-05-16 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCP00039 Hearing Date: May 16, 2024 Dept: 45
Hearing
date: May 16, 2024
Moving
Party: Petitioners Tierra Holding LLC,
FEM Ventures LLC, and QBN Capital, LLC
Responding
Party: None
Petition
to Confirm Arbitration Award
The Court
considered the moving papers.
The
petition is GRANTED
Background
On December 21,
2023, Arbitrator Kathy Vogdes, Esq. (the “Arbitrator”) issued an arbitration
award (the “Award”) in the amount of $3,147,389.44 for Petitioners Tierra
Holding LLC, FEM Ventures LLC, and QBN Capital, LLC (collectively
“Petitioners”) and against Respondents G2K Holdings, LLC, Eugenio A. Gonzalez,
Robert Knohl, and Monica Gonzalez, (collectively “Respondents”).
On January 5,
2024, Petitioners filed the instant Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award
(“Petition”) against Respondents.
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.) “Regardless
of the particular relief granted, any arbitrator’s award is enforceable only
when confirmed as a judgment of the superior court.” (O’Hare v. Municipal
Resource Consultants (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 267, 278.) “Once a petition to
confirm an award is filed, the superior court must select one of only four
courses of action: it may confirm the award, correct and confirm it, vacate it,
or dismiss the petition.” (EHM Productions, Inc. v. Starline Tours of
Hollywood, Inc. (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 1058, 1063.) “It is well settled that the
scope of judicial review of arbitration awards is extremely narrow.”
(California Faculty Assn. v. Superior Court (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 935, 943.)
“Neither the trial court, nor the appellate court, may ‘review the merits of
the dispute, the sufficiency of the evidence, or the arbitrator’s reasoning,
nor may we correct or review an award because of an arbitrator’s legal or
factual error, even if it appears on the award’s face.” (EHM Productions,
supra, at p. 1063-64.)
Discussion
Filing Requirements (Code Civ. Proc., §
1285.4)
Code of Civil
Procedure, section 1285.4 states: “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.) “A response to
a petition under this chapter may request the court to dismiss the petition or
to confirm, correct or vacate the award.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1285.2.)
Here,
Petitioners have satisfied the requirements of CCP section 1285.4 by setting
forth the substance of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate with the Petition.
(Nordsten Decl. ¶ 2; Exh. A.) Petitioners provide the Court with a copy of the Stock
Purchase Agreement and Secured Promissory Note between the parties, which
includes the relevant arbitration agreement. (Id.) Petitioners set forth
the Arbitrator’s name, Hon. Kirk H. Nakamura (Ret.), and attach a copy of the
Arbitrator’s award for $3,147,389.44, which represents the total amount awarded
to Petitioners in damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs to Petitioners.
(Id.¶¶ 8-11; Exh. I.) Respondents have not filed any response requesting
the Court to dismiss the petition or to confirm, correct or vacate the award.
Thus, the Court finds that Petitioners have satisfied CCP section 1285.4.
Service of the
Petition and Notice of Hearing (Code Civ. Proc. § 1290.4)
Code of Civil
Procedure, section 1290.4 states, in relevant part:
“(a) A copy of
the petition and a 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 the 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…”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4(a)&(b).)
Here Petitioners
provide proofs of service indicating that the Petition and notice of the
hearing was electronically served on the Respondents. (Pet. p 8; see 1/30/24 Notice
of Hearing on Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award.) Thus, the Petition satisfies
the service requirements under CCP § 1290.4.
Service of the
Arbitration Award & Timeliness of Petition (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1283.6,
1288, 1288.4)
Code of Civil
Procedure section 1283.6 states, “The 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.” (Code Civ. Proc., §
1283.6.) Additionally, 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 on the petitioner. (Code Civ.
Proc., §§ 1288, 1288.4.)
Here,
Petitioners’ counsel states that the final award was served on the parties on
December 21, 2023. (Nordsten Decl. ¶¶ 11-12.) The Petition was filed on January
5, 2024, more than 10 days after the final award was served. Thus, the Court
finds that the petition satisfies the requirements under CCP §§ 1283.6, 1288,
and 1288.4.
Accordingly,
since the procedural requirements have been satisfied, the Court GRANTS
Petitioner’s Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award.
It
is so ordered.
Dated:
_______________________
MEL RED RECANA
Judge of the
Superior Court