This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/05/2020 at 09:17:39 (UTC).

JORGE MARTINEZ VS GERARDO FLORES, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 08/28/2019 JORGE MARTINEZ filed an Other - Arbitration lawsuit against GERARDO FLORES. 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 Disposed - Other Disposed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3758

  • Filing Date:

    08/28/2019

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Other Disposed

  • Case Type:

    Other - Arbitration

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Petitioner

MARTINEZ JORGE

Respondents

FLORES GERARDO

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PACIFIC CO.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner Attorney

LOVETT STEVEN R.

 

Court Documents

Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment - Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment

9/3/2020: Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment - Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

5/6/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Order (name extension) - Order Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment

3/25/2020: Order (name extension) - Order Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment

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

2/25/2020: Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

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

12/16/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

12/16/2019: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

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

12/16/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

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

12/18/2019: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Hearing on Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award; Declaration of Steven R. Lovett; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof

12/23/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Hearing on Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award; Declaration of Steven R. Lovett; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof

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

12/26/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

10/28/2019: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

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

10/28/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

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

10/22/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

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

10/1/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition

8/28/2019: Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

8/28/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Petition (name extension) - Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award

8/28/2019: Petition (name extension) - Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

8/28/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

10 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/03/2020
  • DocketAcknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Petitioner Jorge Martinez against Respondent General Construction Pacific Co. and Respondent Gerardo Flores on the Petition filed by Jorge Martinez on 08/28/2019 for the principal amount of $11,235.00 and costs of $539.30 for a total of $11,774.30.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Order Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment: Status changed from Filed to Signed and Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • DocketOrder Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2020
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs (Summary); Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent); Total Costs: 539.30

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2020
  • DocketNon-Appearance Case Review re lodging of proposed judgment scheduled for 03/13/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 02/25/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2020
  • DocketNon-Appearance Case Review re lodging of proposed judgment scheduled for 03/13/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2020
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitrati...)

    Read MoreRead Less
11 More Docket Entries
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketNotice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/01/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent); Proof of Mailing Date: 09/13/2019; Service Cost: 65.55; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketHearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award scheduled for 01/02/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • DocketNotice of Hearing on Petition; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2019
  • DocketPetition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STCP03758    Hearing Date: February 24, 2020    Dept: 26

Martinez v. Flores, et al.

PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

(CCP § 1285)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner Jorge Martinez’s Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award is GRANTED. Judgment to be entered in conforminty with the terms of the award.

ANALYSIS:

On December 6, 2018, an arbitrator issued an Arbitration Award in favor of Petitioner Jorge Martinez (“Petitioner”) against Respondents Gerardo Flores and General Construction Pacific Co. (“Respondents”).

On August 28, 2019, Petitioner filed the instant Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (the “Petition”). The Petition was originally scheduled for a hearing on January 2, 2020. However, the hearing was continued to February 24, 2020. On December 23, 2019, Petitioner filed a notice of continuance with an additional memorandum of points and authorities. To date, no response has been filed.

Legal Standard

Per CCP § 1285, “Any party to an arbitration in which an award has been made may petition the court to confirm, correct or vacate the award. The petition shall name as respondent all parties to the arbitration and may name as respondents any other persons bound by the arbitration award.”

Per CCP § 1285.4, “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 arbitrator; and (c) Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.”

Per CCP § 1286, “If a petition or response under this chapter is duly served and filed, the court shall confirm the award as made, whether rendered in this state or another state, unless in accordance with this chapter it corrects the award and confirms it as corrected, vacates the award or dismisses the proceeding.”

Discussion

Service of the Petition and Notice of Hearing

Code of Civil Procedure, section 1290.4 requires the Petition and Notice of Hearing to be served on Respondent “in the manner provided in the arbitration agreement for the service of such petition and notice” or “[i]f the arbitration agreement does not provide the manner in which such service shall be made . . . [s]ervice within this State shall be made in the manner provided by law for the service of summons in an action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4, subds. (a), (b).)

Petitioner has filed proofs of service demonstrating substitute service on the individual Respondent[1] and service on the agent for service of process on the entity Respondent[2] of the Petition, the original notice of hearing, and the notice of continuance. The court notes that the service address reflects a different address for Respondents listed on the papers filed with the arbitrator. Nevertheless, the court has no reason to disbelieve the filed proofs of service by a registered process server.

Therefore, the court finds that Petitioner has complied with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure, section 1290.4.

Service of the Arbitration Award (CCP §§ 1283.6, 1288)

The arbitration award was served on both parties on June 14, 2017, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1283.6. (Pet., Attachment 8(c).) Furthermore, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1288, a petition to confirm arbitration must be filed and served no more than four years after the award was served. The award here was issued on June 14, 2017 and the Petition was timely filed originally on August 28, 2019 and timely served in September 2019.

Confirmation of the Arbitration Award

An arbitration award is not directly enforceable until it is confirmed by a court and judgment is entered. (CCP § 1287.6; Jones v. Kvistad (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 836, 840.) The court must confirm the award as made, unless it corrects or vacates the award, or dismisses the proceeding. (CCP § 1286; Valsan Partners Limited Partnership v. Calcor Space Facility, Inc. (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 809, 818.) 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.

  3. Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 1285.4.) The petition complies with the above requirements. It attaches a copy of the agreement to arbitrate. (Petition, Attachment 4(a).) It also sets forth the name of the Arbitrator (Thomas Craigo), and attaches a copy of the Award to the Petition. (Petition, ¶¶ 4, 6 and Attachment 8(c).) On December 6, 2018, the arbitrator issued an award requiring Respondents to pay Petitioner $ 21,235.00. (Id. at Attachment 8(c), p. 5.) Accordingly, Petitioner has complied with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure, section 1285.4, subdivision (a).

The court notes that Petitioner claims that Respondents have paid some of the amount of the award, leaving a balance due of $11,235.00. (Petition ¶ 8b(4).) The award has not fully been paid and therefore the court does not enter satisfaction of judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (d).)

Interest

The court notes that Petitioner seeks interest at the statutory rate from June 15, 2017. (Petition ¶ 10d(1).) The court’s review of the award does not indicate that Respondents were required to pay interest. Therefore, the court denies this request.

Award of Costs

Finally, Petitioner requests an award of costs of suit incurred herein. (Petition ¶ 10e(2).) Costs and fees incurred in judicial proceedings to enforce an arbitration award are recoverable by the prevailing party as a matter of right. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1293.2; Austin v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 1812, 1815-1816.) CRC, Rule 3.1700 governs prejudgment costs, including the filing fee now sought by Petitioner. To obtain such costs, Petitioner must “serve and file a memorandum of costs within 15 days after the date of service of the notice of entry of judgment.” (CRC, Rule 3.1700(a)(1).)

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award is granted.

Moving party to give notice and file proposed judgment consistent with this decision.


[1] The December 26, 2019 filed proof of service does not reflect separate service on the individual Respondent of the continuance of hearing. However, the individual Respondent received the papers because he is also the agent for service of process for the entity Respondent.

[2] The October 1, 2019 filed proof of service reflects service on the entity Respondent by mail only. However, the entity Respondent received the papers because the agent for service of process for the entity Respondent is the individual Respondent, whom was served by substitute service.