On 05/29/2019 a Other - Arbitration case was filed by GAGIK HARUTYUNAN against MO GARIB in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
JAMES E. BLANCARTE
PARADISE PROPERTIES INVESTMENT LLC
10/2/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)
5/29/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order
5/29/2019: Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award - Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award
5/29/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet
5/29/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
5/29/2019: Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition
Hearing12/16/2019 at 10:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Petition (name extension)Read MoreRead Less
DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award scheduled for 10/02/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 12/16/2019 10:30 AMRead MoreRead Less
DocketHearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award scheduled for 12/16/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)Read MoreRead Less
DocketHearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award scheduled for 10/02/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk CourthouseRead MoreRead Less
DocketPetition to Confirm Arbitration Award; Filed by: Gagik Harutyunan (Petitioner); As to: Mo Garib (Respondent); Paradise Properties Investment, LLC (Respondent)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Gagik Harutyunan (Petitioner); As to: Mo Garib (Respondent); Paradise Properties Investment, LLC (Respondent)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Hearing on Petition; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: 19STCP02110 Hearing Date: December 16, 2019 Dept: 94
Harutyunan v. Garib, et al.
PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
(CCP § 1281.2)
For lack of service, Petitioner Gagik Harutyunyan’s Petition to Compel Arbitration is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.
Pursuant to CCP § 1290, a party may initiate an action by petitioning the Court to resolve an arbitral issue. As such, Petitioner Gagik Harutyunyan (“Petitioner”) initiate this action with a Petition to Compel Respondents Mo Garib and Paradise Properties Investment, LLC (collectively, “Respondents”) to Submit to Arbitration (the “Petition”) on May 29, 2019. Notably, no opposition or reply has been filed.
Because Petitioner initiated this action by way of a petition, he must serve his Petition in the manner prescribed by CCP § 1290.4. “Proper service of process of a petition or complaint is the means by which a court obtains personal jurisdiction over a party. [Citations.]” (Abers v. Rohrs (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1199, 1206, emphasis added.) CCP § 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.”
manner provided by law for the service of summons in an action” as Respondents have not made a general appearance in this action.
At the initial hearing on October 2, 2019, the Court noted that there was no proof of service to establish that service was effectuated in such manner and found it could not consider the Petition. The Court ordered Petitioner is ordered to serve the Petition in the manner required by CCP § 1290.4(a) and file a proof of service of the same at least 16 court days before the new hearing date. On November 18, 2019, Petitioner filed a “Notice of Continued Hearing” which indicated only that the Notice of Continued Hearing was served on Respondent by mail.
As no proof of service of the Petition has been filed, nor proof of service of the Notice of Hearing in conformity with section 1290.4, the Petition is PLACED OFF CALENDAR.