This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/09/2020 at 08:49:35 (UTC).

ATKINSON-BAKER, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS BYRON T. BALL, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 05/07/2020 ATKINSON-BAKER, INC , A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against BYRON T BALL. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3898

  • Filing Date:

    05/07/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ATKINSON-BAKER INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Defendants

THE BALL LAW FIRM LLP A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

BALL BYRON T.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

BATES JAMES

 

Court Documents

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

7/8/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

6/19/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

6/22/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

6/25/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

5/7/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

5/7/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

5/7/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

5/7/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

5/7/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/11/2023
  • Hearing05/11/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/04/2021
  • Hearing11/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketOn the Complaint filed by Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation on 05/07/2020, entered Request for Dismissal without prejudice filed by Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation, does 1 thru 25, inclusive

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketAddress for James Bates (Attorney) null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/25/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Byron T. Ball (Defendant); The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/25/2020
  • DocketDefault entered as to Byron T. Ball; The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership; On the Complaint filed by Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation on 05/07/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/22/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Byron T. Ball (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 05/13/2020; Service Cost: 80.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant); As to: The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant); Service Date: 05/13/2020; Service Cost: 80.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 05/11/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Byron T. Ball (Defendant); The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Byron T. Ball (Defendant); The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Atkinson-Baker, Inc., a California corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Byron T. Ball (Defendant); The Ball Law Firm, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 26 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STLC03898    Hearing Date: March 30, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., March 30, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: EPR Recruiting, Inc. v. Arcamm Fire Protection, LTD

CASE NUMBER: 20STCP03898 PET. FILED: 11-24-20

NOTICE: NO

PROCEEDINGS: PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner EPR Recruiting, Inc.

RESP. PARTY: None

PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

(CCP § 1285)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner EPR Recruiting, Inc.’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is CONTINUED TO MAY 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Petitioner must file supplemental papers demonstrating Respondent was properly served. Failure to do so may result in the Petition being placed off calendar or denied.

SERVICE:

[ ] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) NO

[ ] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) NO

[ ] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) NO

OPPOSITION: None filed as of March 26, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of March 26, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On November 24, 2020, Petitioner EPR Recruiting, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed this Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award (the “Petition”) against Respondent Arcamm Fire Protection, Ltd. (“Respondent”). No opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard

“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.)

  1. Discussion

 

A. Service of the Petition, and Notice of Hearing (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4.)

Code of Civil Procedure, section 1290.4 states, in pertinent 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.

Here, the parties’ agreement does not provide for a manner of service. (Pet., Attach. 4(c).) Thus, service of this Petition must be made in the same manner as service of summons. Service of a summons may be accomplished by personal service, by substitute service, by mail with acknowledgment of receipt, or by publication. (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.10, et seq.)

The proof of service filed by Petitioner states the Petition and Notice of Hearing were mailed on November 25, 2020 to an address outside of California, specifically in Canada, with a return receipt requested as permitted by Code of Civil Procedure section 415.40. (11/25/20 Proof of Service.) However, because the person to be served is located outside the United States, Section 413.10 applies, which states:

“Except as otherwise provided by statute, a summons shall be served on a person:

(a) Within this state, as provided in this chapter.

(b) Outside this state but within the United States, as provided in this chapter or as prescribed by the law of the place where the person is served.

(c) Outside the United States, as provided in this chapter or as directed by the court in which the action is pending, or, if the court before or after service finds that the service is reasonably calculated to give actual notice, as prescribed by the law of the place where the person is served or as directed by the foreign authority in response to a letter rogatory. These rules are subject to the provisions of the Convention on the ‘Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents’ in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Service Convention).” (Emphasis added.)

Under the Hague Convention, each contracting state must designate a “Central Authority” which will undertake to receive requests for service from other contracting states. (Convention Done at the Hague November 15, 1965; (Feb. 10, 1969) T.I.A.S. No. 6638.) The Central Authority of each state shall be organized in conformity with its own laws. (Id.) Both the United States and Canada are contracting states. (https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=17P.) Failure to comply with the [Hague] Convention renders the service void, even if the defendant has actual notice of the lawsuit. [Citation.]” (Floveyor Internat., Ltd. v. Superior Court (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 789, 794.)

Here Petitioner did not discuss what the requirements for service in Canada are nor that it complied with the requirements set forth by Canada’s Central Authority. Thus, before considering the merits of the Petition, Petitioner must file supplemental papers discussing the requirements for service in Canada under Section 413.10 and the Hague Convention and demonstrating Petitioner’s method of service satisfies those requirements.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner EPR Recruiting, Inc.’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is CONTINUED TO MAY 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Petitioner must file supplemental papers demonstrating Respondent was properly served. Failure to do so may result in the Petition being placed off calendar or denied.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where BALL LAW FIRM LLP THE is a litigant

Latest cases where ATKINSON-BAKER INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant