This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/02/2021 at 04:51:03 (UTC).

GC MANAGEMENT, LLC VS EDGAR SANCHEZ, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 08/11/2020 GC MANAGEMENT, LLC filed an Other - Arbitration lawsuit against EDGAR SANCHEZ. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Disposed - Other Disposed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2553

  • Filing Date:

    08/11/2020

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Other Disposed

  • Case Type:

    Other - Arbitration

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Petitioner

GC MANAGEMENT LLC

Respondents

SANCHEZ EDGAR

RANGEL SERGIO

SANCHEZ MARIA

SANCHEZ GLORIA

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner Attorney

LUBEGA STEPHEN K LUBEGA

Respondent Attorney

THOMAS RIKISHA DIONNE

 

Court Documents

Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

7/28/2021: Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

Notice (name extension) - Notice Entry of Judgment

7/2/2021: Notice (name extension) - Notice Entry of Judgment

Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

7/7/2021: Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Luis Rocha in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

4/15/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Luis Rocha in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

Brief (name extension) - Brief in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

4/15/2021: Brief (name extension) - Brief in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Lanie Santos in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

4/15/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Lanie Santos in Support of Petition to Confirm Award

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)

5/6/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)

3/8/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award)

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

2/8/2021: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

1/15/2021: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

12/7/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

12/8/2020: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

12/8/2020: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

9/30/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

9/30/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

8/11/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

8/11/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition

8/11/2020: Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition

19 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/28/2021
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/28/2021
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by: Maria Sanchez (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs (Summary); Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Total Costs: 2140.43

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2021
  • DocketNotice Entry of Judgment; Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2021
  • DocketNon-Appearance Case Review Re: Filing of Proposed Judgment scheduled for 06/03/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 06/02/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment Proposed: Filed By: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); Result: Granted; Result Date: 05/18/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment entered on 05/18/2021 ; Costs: 2,140.43 ; Status changed from Entered to Interlineated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2021
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Petitioner GC Management, LLC against Respondent Edgar Sanchez on the Petition filed by GC Management, LLC on 08/11/2020 for the principal amount of $10,480.00 for a total of $10,480.00.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment entered on 05/18/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2021
  • DocketNon-Appearance Case Review Re: Filing of Proposed Judgment scheduled for 06/03/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
25 More Docket Entries
  • 09/30/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Service Date: 08/25/2020; Service Cost: 75.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/12/2020
  • DocketHearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award scheduled for 12/15/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/12/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketPetition to Confirm Arbitration Award; Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Gloria Sanchez (Respondent) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Gloria Sanchez (Respondent) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Gloria Sanchez (Respondent) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketSummons on Petition; Issued and Filed by: GC Management, LLC (Petitioner); As to: Edgar Sanchez (Respondent); Maria Sanchez (Respondent); Gloria Sanchez (Respondent) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketNotice of Hearing on Petition; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STCP02553    Hearing Date: May 6, 2021    Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: PETITION TO CONFIRM CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner GC Management, LLC

RESP. PARTY: Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez

PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

(CCP § 1285, et al.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner GC Management, LLC’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is GRANTED as to Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez but DENIED as to Respondents Sergio Rangel and Gloria Sanchez. Petitioner is to file a proposed order within ten (10) days.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of May 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of May 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On August 11, 2020, Petitioner GC Management, LLC (“Petitioner”) filed the instant Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award (the “Petition”) against Respondents Edgar Sanchez (“Edgar”), Maria Sanchez (“Maria”), Gloria Sanchez (“Gloria”), and Sergio Rangel (“Rangel”) (collectively, “Respondents”). The Petition is based on an Arbitration Award rendered by the Hon. Chris R. Conway (the “Arbitrator”) with Judicate West on March 18, 2020 in favor of Petitioner. (Pet., Attach. 4.) Respondents Edgar and Maria filed an Answer on December 8, 2020, but no opposition.

The Court continued the initial March 8 hearing and requested that both parties file supplemental papers in support of their requests. (3/8/21 Minute Order.) On April 15, Petitioner filed a supplemental brief and supporting declarations. Respondents Maria and Edgar did not file any supplemental papers.

II. 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.)

III. Discussion

A. Filing Requirements (Code Civ. Proc., § 1285.4)

Code of Civil Procedure, section 1285.4 states: “A petition under this chapter shall:

(a) Set forth the substance of or have attached a copy of the agreement to arbitrate unless the petitioner denies the existence of such an agreement.

(b) Set forth the names of the arbitrators.

(c) Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.”

The Petition attaches a copy of the Arbitration Award, which includes the name of the neutral Arbitrator, and a lease agreement signed by all Respondents. (Pet., Exhs. 1, 4.) At the previous hearing, the Court found that Petitioner included a copy of a Stipulation for Formal Hearing signed by Respondents Maria and Edgar whereby they agreed to submit their controversy to arbitration, but Respondents Sergio and Gloria had not. (3/8/21 Minute Order.)

In its supplemental brief, Petitioner explains that, as co-tenants, all Respondents were required to participate or waive participation in the dispute resolution that was initiated solely by Respondent Maria. (4/15/21 Pet. Supp. Brief, p. 4:1-13.) Petitioner points to the “Grievance and Appeal Procedures and Practices” (the “Grievance Procedures”) which are incorporated into Respondents’ lease agreement with Petitioner. (Id.) However, nothing in this section states that the election of one or more tenant under the lease agreement to voluntarily proceed with an arbitration hearing is automatically binding on the remaining tenants that do not choose to participate in an arbitration hearing. (See Pet., Exh. 1, House Rules, § 8.)

In addition, the Hearing Officer’s Report states that the hearing was between Respondents Maria and Edgar and Petitioner only and makes no finding regarding the enforceability of the Award against the non-participating tenants, Respondents Sergio and Gloria. (Pet., Attach. 4.)

Petitioner seeks to enforce the Arbitration Award, which includes damages of $10,480.00, against all Respondents. (Id., ¶ 3.) However, this amount was awarded only against Respondents Maria and Edgar. (Id.) Specifically, the Arbitration Award states:

“Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez are responsible for the payment of all unpaid rent for Unit 206 which the Hearing Officer finds to be the sum of $10,480.00 as of February 2020. The hearing Office further finds that Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez are not responsible for the payment of any part of the Hearing Officer’s fees, including the Case Management Fee and the Retainer.”

(Id.)

Thus, the Court finds this Petition is proper as to Respondents Maria and Edgar only and that the Section 1285.4 requirements as to Respondents Maria and Edgar have been satisfied.

B. 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.

At the previous hearing, the Court found this requirement satisfied. (3/8/21 Minute Order.)

C. Service of the Arbitration Award & Timeliness of Petition (CCP §§ 1283.6, 1288, 1288.4)

Code of Civil Procedure section 1283.6 provides that: “The neutral arbitrator shall serve a signed copy of the award on each party to the arbitration personally or by registered or certified mail or as provided in the agreement.” (Emphasis added.) Here, the Arbitration Award was served on Respondents Edgar and Maria on March 18, 2020 via email to their former attorney. (Pet., Attach. 4.) Although the Arbitrator served the Award in a slightly different manner than required, “the sole function of the service of an award upon the parties to an arbitration is to give them notice of the existence and contents of the award.” (Murray v. Civil Service Emp. Ins. Co., supra, at p. 799.) The Court finds that function was satisfied here.

In addition, this Petition was filed more than ten days after the Award was served, on August 11, 2020. Thus Sections 1283.6, 1288, and 1288.4 have been satisfied.

D. Request for Monthly Installment Payments

In their response filed on December 8, 2020, Respondents Edgar and Maria do not oppose the confirmation of the Arbitration Award, but do request that the Court set monthly installment payments for the judgment of no more than $400.00 per month. (12/8/20 Resp. Brief.) Respondents Edgar and Maria seek an installment payment plan because they argue they cannot pay the full amount of the judgment due to difficulties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. (Id., Edgar and Maria Decl., p. 2:16-23.)

At the previous hearing, the Court requested supplemental papers from Respondents Edgar and Maria discussing whether they attempted to negotiate a payment plan with Petitioner before seeking judicial intervention and evidence demonstrating their inability to pay. (3/8/21 Minute Order.) To date, Respondents Edgar and Maria have not filed any supplemental papers. Thus, their request is DENIED.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner GC Management, LLC’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is GRANTED as to Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez but DENIED as to Respondents Sergio Rangel and Gloria Sanchez. Petitioner is to file a proposed order within ten (10) days.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: 20STCP02553    Hearing Date: March 8, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Mon., March 8, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: GC Management, LLC v. Sanchez, et al. PET. FILED: 08-11-20

CASE NUMBER: 20STCP02553

NOTICE: OK

PROCEEDINGS: PETITION TO CONFIRM CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner GC Management, LLC

RESP. PARTY: Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez

PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

(CCP § 1285)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner GC Management, LLC’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is CONTINUED TO MAY 6, 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 and Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez must file supplemental papers as requested herein. Failure to do so may result in the Petition being placed off calendar or denied.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of March 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of March 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On August 11, 2020, Petitioner GC Management, LLC (“Petitioner”) filed the instant Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award (the “Petition”) against Respondents Edgar Sanchez (“Edgar”), Maria Sanchez (“Maria”), Gloria Sanchez (“Gloria”), and Sergio Rangel (“Rangel”) (collectively, “Respondents”). The Petition is based on an Arbitration Award rendered by the Hon. Chris R. Conway (the “Arbitrator”) on Mach 18, 2020 in favor of Petitioner.

Respondents Edgar and Maria filed an answer on August 11, 2020. No opposition has been filed.

As an initial matter, the Court notes that the arbitration hearing was held in

  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. Filing Requirements (Code Civ. Proc., § 1285.4)

Code of Civil Procedure, section 1285.4 states: “A petition under this chapter shall:

  1. Set forth the substance of or have attached a copy of the agreement to arbitrate unless the petitioner denies the existence of such an agreement.

  2. Set forth the names of the arbitrators.

(c) Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.”

Petitioner includes a copy of a Stipulation for Formal Hearing signed by Respondents Maria and Edgar whereby they agreed to submit their controversy to arbitration. (Pet., Attach 3.) However, Petitioner’s evidence does not demonstrate that Respondents Gloria or Sergio were parties to this agreement to arbitrate. Thus, Petitioner has not satisfied section 1285.4.

B. Service of the Petition, and Notice of Hearing (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1283.6, 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.

The Petition was personally served on Respondent Maria on August 25, 2020, personally served on Respondents Gloria and Edgar on August 26, 2020, and substitute served on Respondent Sergio on August 29, 2020. (9/30/20 Proofs of Service.) Thus, Section 1290.4 is satisfied.

C. Service of the Arbitration Award & Timeliness of Petition (CCP §§ 1283.6, 1288, 1288.4)

Code of Civil Procedure section 1283.6 provides that: “The neutral arbitrator shall serve a signed copy of the award on each party to the arbitration personally or by registered or certified mail or as provided in the agreement.” (Emphasis added.) Here, the Arbitration Award was served on Respondents Edgar and Maria and on Petitioner on March 18, 2020. However, the proof of service included with the Award does not demonstrate the Arbitrator served the Award on Respondents Gloria or Sergio. (Pet., Attach. 4.) Thus, Petitioner has not satisfied section 1283.6.

D. Request for Monthly Installment Payments

In their response filed on December 8, 2020, Respondents Edgar and Maria do not oppose the confirmation of the Arbitration Award, but do request that the Court set monthly installment payments for the judgment of no more than $400.00 per month. (12/8/20 Resp. Brief.) Respondents Edgar and Maria seek an installment payment plan because they argue they cannot pay the full amount of the judgment due to difficulties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. (Id., Edgar and Maria Decl., p. 2:16-23.) However, Respondents did not discuss whether they attempted to negotiate a payment plan with Petitioner prior to seeking judicial intervention. Respondents also have not submitted any documentary evidence demonstrating their inability to satisfy a judgment rendered against them. Thus, Respondents Maria and Edgar are ordered to file and serve supplemental papers in support of their request.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner GC Management, LLC’s Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award is CONTINUED TO MAY 6, 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 and Respondents Edgar Sanchez and Maria Sanchez must file supplemental papers as requested herein. 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 GC MANAGEMENT LLC is a litigant