Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (Judge Michael J. Raphael)


Case Number: BS162502??? Hearing Date: October 24, 2016??? Dept: 51

This matter involves an arbitrated attorney fee dispute. On May 12, 2016, petitioner filed the instant unopposed petition to confirm the arbitration award. The Court considered the moving papers and GRANTS the petition as follows.

Court?s Authority to Confirm Arbitration Award

The parties to arbitration may petition the court to confirm, correct, or vacate the award. CCP ? 1285. A petition to confirm an award must be served and filed not later than four years after the date of service of a signed copy of the award on the petitioner. CCP ? 1288. The petition must also set forth or attach (1) the agreement to arbitrate, (2) the names of the arbitrators, and (3) the substance of the award or attach the award and opinion itself. CCP ? 1285.4.

If a petition or response under this chapter is duly served and filed, the court must confirm the award as made, since neither the merits of the controversy nor the sufficiency of the evidence to support an arbitrator?s award are matters for judicial review. CCP ? 1286; Felner v Meritplan Ins. Co. (1970) 6 Cal.App.3d 540, 545.

Hearings on such petitions should be heard in a summary way, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1290.2. Trabuco Highlands Community Assn. v. Head (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1183, 1190. Pursuant to section 1290.2, a petition to compel arbitration must be heard in a summary manner and upon the notice provided by law for the making and hearing of motions, except that not less than 10 days? notice of the date set for the hearing on the petition must be given.

With limited exceptions not raised here, an arbitrator?s decision is not generally reviewable for errors of fact or law, whether or not such errors appear on the face of the award and cause substantial injustice to the parties. Sy First Family Ltd. Partnership v Cheung (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1334, 1346. In the case of a breach of contract action, as here, an arbitrator?s choice of a remedy must bear some rational relationship to the contract and the breach, and in close cases the arbitrator?s decision must stand. Ibid.

Analysis

Here, petitioner attached a copy of the written award, which identifies John Yzurdiaga as the arbitrator. PET ? 6.c. Petitioner did not attach a copy of the written agreements to arbitrate. The arbitration award states that respondent did not agree to binding arbitration. The award also states, however, that the parties agreed to submit the matter to arbitration on the filed documents. Thus, despite the absence of a copy of the arbitration agreement, the Court is satisfied that the petition substantially satisfies this requirement. See, e.g., Accito v. Matmor Canning Co. (1954) 128 Cal.App.2d 631, 634. Therefore, the petition satisfies section 1285.4?s procedural requirements.

Additionally, the petition is timely and satisfies section 1288, as it was filed on May 12, 2016, which is well within four years of the award?s March 2016 issuance.

The merits of the award are not at issue.

The petition is GRANTED.

Petitioner to give notice.