Judge: Walter P. Schwarm, Case: 30-2021-01211808, Date: 2023-07-25 Tentative Ruling

The court requests the parties to appear to address the court’s tentative ruling set forth below.

Defendants’ (Architectronix, Inc. and John Rix) Motion to Enforce Prior Court Order to Regarding Arbitration (Motion), filed on 5-16-23 under ROA No. 220, is CONTINUED to a date and time to be determined at the hearing on 7-25-23.

In lieu of an opposition, Defendant (Chapwood L.P.) filed a competing Motion to Compel Arbitration on 7-10-23 under ROA No. 240 to compel Defendant Architectronix, Inc. to arbitrate its dispute with Defendant. The Motion to Compel Arbitration is set for hearing on 12-5-23.

The Opposition to the Motion to Compel Arbitration states, “Scinto brought this motion pursuant to the Court’s order on or about May 18, 2023, by which the Court allowed Scinto to file a motion to compel arbitration, which would be heard on the same day as Rix’s motion to enforce a prior Court order, July 25, 2023.” (Opposition filed on 7-12-23, under ROA No. 244; 1:26-28.)

However, Architectronix, Inc. and John Rix (collectively, Rix) oppose the Court hearing the Motion to Compel Arbitration on 1-25-23, on the grounds that Chapwood did not provide sufficient notice of the Motion as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b). The Opposition states,  “It would greatly prejudice Rix to allow Scinto’s Motion to be heard on July 25, 2023, because Rix would be deprived of the statutory time period necessary to properly review and object to Scinto’s motion.” (Opposition; 2:13-15.) The Opposition does not address the merits of the Motion to Compel Arbitration.

Since both Motions address the same issue as to whether Architectronix, Inc. should be compelled to arbitration, the court is inclined to hear both Motions together. Thus, the court will continue the hearing and allow Rix to file an opposition to the Motion to Compel Arbitration on the merits.

Rix may file an opposition to the Motion to Compel Arbitration no later than 9 court days before the continued hearing. Chapwood may file an opposition to this Motion no later than 9 court days before the continued hearing.  Any Reply will be based on the filing requirements in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b).

Defendants are to give notice.