Judge: Richard Y. Lee, Case: 30-2020-01142135, Date: 2022-12-07 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Ferrucci Law Group, APC’s petition for confirmation of the attorney-client fee arbitration award in the amount of $9,239.68 entered against defendant Richard Keller (“Defendant”) on 7/26/22 is GRANTED. 

“The Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act (MFAA), under Business and Professions Code section 6200 et seq., provides a quick and inexpensive method for clients, at their option, to resolve fee disputes with their attorneys.”  (Law Offices of Dixon R. Howell v. Valley (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 1076, 1083; Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6200(c)). 

“Under section 6203, subdivision (b), a party may petition to confirm an arbitration award in the same manner as arbitration awards may be confirmed under Code of Civil Procedure section 1285 of the California Arbitration Act.”  (Giorgianni v. Crowley (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 1462, 1470).

“If a petition or response under this chapter is duly served and filed, the court shall confirm the award as made . . . unless in accordance with this chapter it corrects the award and confirms it as corrected, vacates the award or dismisses the proceeding.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1286). If an award is confirmed, “judgment shall be entered in conformity therewith.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1287.4).

Defendant agrees that entry of judgment in the amount of the arbitration award ($9,239.68), but takes issue with (1) Plaintiff’s proposed start date for the accrual or post-judgment interest and (2) Plaintiff’s request for fees and costs.

The petition indicates that interest at the rate of 10% per year is requested commencing on 8/1/22. Defendant contends that post-judgment interest should begin to accrue on the date of entry of judgment. The court agrees. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 685.020; Pellegrini v. Weiss (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 515, 532-533).

Defendant also contends that Plaintiff is not entitled to fees or costs because it was not the prevailing party in the arbitration. The arbitration was initiated by Defendant, who sought a finding that any alleged outstanding amounts owed to Ferrucci Law Group be reduced. Defendant contends that he was the prevailing party because the arbitrators credited Defendant with his filing fee and only awarded Plaintiff approximately 25% of what it claimed was owed.

As a preliminary matter, Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6203(c)  provides that “[n]either party to the arbitration may recover costs or attorney's fees incurred in preparation for or in the course of the fee arbitration proceeding with the exception of the filing fee paid pursuant to subdivision (a) of this section.” Thus, the only fees that or costs that may be recovered are those incurred in connection with this petition.

In that regard, Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6203(c) provides that “a court confirming, correcting, or vacating an award under this section may award to the prevailing party reasonable fees and costs incurred in obtaining confirmation, correction, or vacation of the award including, if applicable, fees and costs on appeal.”

Here, Plaintiff is the prevailing party on the petition to confirm the arbitration award and therefore entitled to fees and costs incurred in connection with obtaining the confirmation.

Defendant next contends that Plaintiff is not entitled to fees because Joe Ferrucci represented his own law firm at the arbitration, and therefore no fees were incurred. Whether Plaintiff incurred any eligible fees is a question to be determined by way of fee motion.

The petition is GRANTED, along with Plaintiff’s request for post-judgment interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff’s shall file a separate motion for fees. 

Plaintiff shall give notice.