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.
*******3758
08/28/2019
Disposed - Other Disposed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
SERENA R. MURILLO
MARTINEZ JORGE
FLORES GERARDO
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PACIFIC CO.
LOVETT STEVEN R.
9/3/2020: Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment - Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment
5/6/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling
3/25/2020: Order (name extension) - Order Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment
2/25/2020: Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)
12/16/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service
12/16/2019: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment
12/16/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment
12/18/2019: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order
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
12/26/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service
10/28/2019: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment
10/28/2019: 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
10/1/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service
8/28/2019: Notice of Hearing on Petition - Notice of Hearing on Petition
8/28/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet
8/28/2019: Petition (name extension) - Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award
8/28/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order
DocketAcknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)
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.
DocketUpdated -- Order Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment: Status changed from Filed to Signed and Filed
DocketOrder Confirming Arbitration Award and Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent)
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)
DocketMemorandum of Costs (Summary); Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent); Total Costs: 539.30
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
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
DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Petition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitrati...)
DocketNotice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by: Clerk
DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner)
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
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
DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse
DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk
DocketNotice of Hearing on Petition; Filed by: Clerk
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)
DocketPetition Petition to Confirm Contractual Arbitration Award; Filed by: Jorge Martinez (Petitioner); As to: Gerardo Flores (Respondent); General Construction Pacific Co. (Respondent)
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:
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. Set forth the names of the
arbitrators. 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.
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases